Division   JDOciofcl 

Section     rr'^4-l 


OTHER  WORKS  BY  E 

I.  A.  HAYES 

i6mo.     Net,  35 

cents 

THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM 

THE  GIFT  OF  TONGUES 

i6mo.     Net,  50 

cents 

THE  MOST  BEAUTIFUL  BOOK 

EVER  WRITTEN 
i2ino.     Net,  75  cents 

PAUL  AND  HIS  EPISTLES 

Crown  8vo.     Net, 

$2.00 

JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Crown  8vo.     Net, 

$2.00 

Biblical  Introduction  Series 


'tr 


MAY   9  191  p 


/i 


%  CG/CAL  ll^t 


The  Synoptic  Gospels 
and  the  Book  of  Acts 


By 
D.  A.  HAYES 


Professor  of  New  Testament  Interpretation  in  the  Graduate  School  of  Theology 
Garrett  Biblical  loititute 


THE  METHODIST  BOOK  CONCERN 

NEW  YORK  CINCINNATI 


Copyright,  1919,  by 
D.  A.  HAYES 


THE  MOST  BEAUTIFUL  BOOK  EVER  WRITTEN 

Copyright,  1913,  by 

D.  A.  HAYES 

THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM 

Copyright,  1912,  by 

D.  A.  HAYES 


TO 

HENRY  BUTLER  SCHWARTZ 

ONCE  MY  ROOMMATE 

ALWAYS  A  MISSIONARY 

FOR  LONG  THE  WHOLE  WHITE  POPULATION 

OF  THE  LU-CHU  ISLANDS 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Foreword ^  * 

PART  I 

"THE  MOST  IMPORTANT  BOOK  EVER  WRITTEN" 
THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW 

I,  Some  Estimates  of  the  First  Gospel 17 

II.  Matthew *9 

1.  His  Name, 

2.  His  Relationships. 

3.  His  Biography. 

4.  Traditions  Concerning  Him. 

5.  The  Man  and  His  Character. 

6.  His  Fitness  for  His  Work. 

III.  The  Book  and  Some  of  Its  Characteristics 39 

1.  The  Gospel  for  the  Jews. 

2.  The  Gospel  of  Fulfillment. 

3.  The  Gospel  of  Righteousness. 

4.  The  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom. 

5.  The  Gospel  of  Jesus  the  King. 

6.  The  Gospel  of  Gloom. 

7.  The  Official  Gospel. 

8.  The  Gospel  of  Hope  for  the  Gentiles. 

9.  The  Gospel  of  the  Church. 

10.  The  Gospel  of  the  Publican. 

11.  The  Gospel  of  Systematic  Arrangement. 

12.  The  Gospel  of  the  Threes  and  Sevens. 

13.  The  Gospel  of  Dreams. 

14.  The  Gospel  of  the  Five  Great  Discourses. 

15.  The  Gospel  of  the  Four  Great  Mountains. 

IV.  The  Man  and  the  Book 83 

V.  Peculiar  Portions 88 

VI.  The  Aim  of  the  Gospel 89 

VII.  The  Gospel's  Affinities  among  the  New  Testament 

Books 9^ 

VIII.   Outline  of  the  Gospel 93 

IX.   Time  and  Place  of  Writing 95 

7 


8  CONTENTS 

PART  II 

THE  MOST  AUTHENTIC  GOSPEL 

THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

PAGE 

I.  The  Author 99 

1.  His  Name. 

2.  Facts  of  His  Life. 

3.  His  Character. 

4.  Traditions  Concerning  Him. 

II.  Traditions  as  to  the  Writing  of  the  Gospel 119 

III.  Characterizations  of  the  Gospel 125 

1.  The  Gospel  for  the  Latin  Peoples. 

2.  The  Gospel  of  the  Strenuous  Life. 

3.  The  Gospel  of  Repeated  Retirements. 

4.  The  Gospel  of  Vivid  Description. 

5.  The  Disciple  Gospel. 

6.  Peter's  Gospel. 

7.  The  Gospel  of  the  Strong  Son  of  God. 

8.  The  Gospel  of  Service. 

IV.  Noteworthy  Additions  to  the  Gospel  Narrative 155 

V.  The  Style  of  the  Gospel 158 

VI.  The  Most  Authentic  and  Authoritative  Gospel 159 

VII.  The  Appendix  to  the  Second  Gospel,  Mark  16.  9-20. .   164 

PART  III 
"THE  MOST  BEAUTIFUL  BOOK  EVER  WRITTEN" 
THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE 
I.  The  Author 177 

1.  The  New  Testament  Data. 

2.  The  Name  "Luke." 

3.  Luke,  the  Companion  of  Paul. 

4.  Luke,  the  Physician. 

5.  Luke,  the  Musician. 

6.  Luke,  the  Artist. 

7.  Luke,  the  Gentile. 

8.  Luke,  Citizen  of  Antioch. 

9.  Luke,  the  Freedman. 
ID.  Luke  in  Later  Tradition. 
II.  An  Outline  Biography. 

II.  Sources  of  the  Gospel 199 

III.  Date  of  the  Gospel 202 

IV.  Place  of  Writing 204 


CONTENTS  9 

PAGE 

V.   Characterizations  of  the  Gospel 205 

1.  The  Gospel  for  the  Gentiles. 

2.  The  Gospel  of  an  Educated  Man. 

3.  The  Gospel  of  the  Physician. 

4.  The  Gospel  of  Childhood. 

5.  The  Gospel  of  Wonianhood. 

6.  The  Gospel  for  the  Poor. 

7.  The  Gospel  for  the  Outcasts. 

8.  The  Pauline  Gospel. 

9.  The  Gospel  of  Jesus,  our  Brother-Man. 
10.  The  Gospel  of  Praise. 

VI.  The  Gospel  and  the  Man  Luke 264 

PART  IV 
THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM 

I.  Definitions 269 

II.   Resemblances ■ 270 

III.  Differences 276 

IV.  Responsibilities 283 

V.  Aids 286 

VI.  Theories 289 

VII.  Conclusions 294 

PART  V 
THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS 
I.   Name  of  the  Book 303 

1.  The  Acts  of  Peter  and  Paul. 

2.  The  Acts  of  the  Ascended  Lord. 

3.  The  Acts  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

4.  The  Acts  of  the  Missionary  Church. 

5.  The  Acts  of  the  Methodist  Church. 

II.   Importance  of  the  Book 311 

1.  As  a  Church  Historj'. 

2.  As  a  Help  to  Faith. 

3.  As  a  Manual  of  Revivals. 

4.  As  a  Biography  of  Paul. 

III.  Noticeable  Features  of  the  Book 318 

1.  Omissions. 

2.  Parallelisms. 

3.  Accuracy. 

IV.  Author  and  Sources  of  Information 333 

Bibliography 337 

Indexes 343 


FOREWORD 

So  many  volumes  have  been  published  in  this  field  that 
it  may  seem  a  work  of  supererogation  to  add  to  the  list.  Our 
only  excuse  for  doing  so  is  that  we  have  made  a  new  pre- 
sentation and  arrangement  of  the  existing  material,  and 
that  we  have  attempted  to  give  it  added  interest  and  life 
by  joining  with  it  a  study  of  the  personalities  of  the  writers 
involved  and  of  the  influence  of  their  personalities  upon 
their  books.  As  far  as  we  know,  this  has  not  been  done 
before  in  the  same  manner  or  to  the  same  degree. 

One  of  the  writer's  students  gave  a  series  of  lectures  in  a 
Western  college  upon  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John, 
and  he  reports  that  at  the  end  of  the  course  the  president  of 
the  school  thanked  him  for  them  and  said :  "Do  you  know, 
I  never  more  than  half  believed  before  that  those  evangel- 
ists were  real  men !  Now  they  will  be  living  personalities 
for  me."  That  has  been  one  aim  in  this  and  the  preced- 
ing volumes — to  give  added  interest  to  the  study  of  the  New 
Testament  books,  because  in  them  we  were  able  to  see  the 
manifested  characters  of  the  men  who  wrote  them,  and  to 
realize  that  however  little  we  might  know  of  these  authors, 
they  yet  were  not  mere  shadows  or  myths,  but  real  men  with 
real  messages  taken  out  of  their  own  real  experience  in  life. 
Too  many  people  have  only  half  believed  that  these  authors 
were  real  men,  and  for  that  reason  they  may  have  found 
themselves  only  half  interested  in  their  writings. 

We  may  claim  whatever  added  interest  there  may  be  in 
a  study  of  the  New  Testament  books  from  the  standpoint 
of  the  personalities  of  their  authors  as  the  differentiat- 
ing characteristic   of   these   volumes   on   New   Testament 

II 


12  FOREWORD 

Introduction.  At  least  they  attempt  to  introduce  both 
the  writers  and  the  books.  Therefore  we  called  the  first 
volume  Paul  and  His  Epistles,  and  the  second  John  and  His 
Writings;  and  in  this  volume  we  combine  the  study  of  the 
men  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke,  with  the  study  of  their 
books.  Behind  each  of  these  writings  we  have  found  and 
have  attempted  to  point  out  a  living  man  whose  personal 
experience  and  individual  character  were  manifest  in  and 
through  his  written  words.  Every  book  is  likely  to  be  in 
some  measure  an  autobiography.  The  books  discussed  in 
this  volume  are  continuously  suggestive  of  personal  traits. 

There  are  those  who  deny  that  the  Gospels  were  written 
by  any  of  the  men  with  whose  names  they  are  connected 
now,  and  to  such  people  our  method  will  seem  wholly  aside 
from  the  mark.  There  are  others  who  so  stress  the  original 
sources  and  so  divide  up  the  existing  Gospels  among  these 
sources,  and  then  add  to  them  such  an  indefinite  number  of 
editors  and  revisers  as  largely,  if  not  wholly,  to  lose  sight  of 
any  single  personality  in  connection  with  them.  Yet  the 
Gospels  themselves  persist  in  maintaining  such  individuality 
of  character  and  such  unity  of  style  and  composition  as  to 
belie  all  attempts  to  partition  them  among  many  hands.  One 
man  has  put  his  stamp  upon  each,  and  from  however  many 
sources  he  may  have  compiled  his  material,  and  however 
many  editors  and  revisers  may  have  made  minor  changes  in 
his  work,  the  single  personality  still  dominates  each  book 
and  makes  it  worthy  to  be  called  by  his  name. 

We  agree  with  Peake  when  he  says  concerning  the  second 
Gospel :  "In  the  case  of  all  the  synoptists  they  are  corrobo- 
rated by  unbroken  tradition,  and  no  plausible  reason  can  be 
suggested  why  Mark  should  have  been  chosen  for  the 
authorship  of  this  Gospel  if  he  had  no  hand  in  it.  .  .  .  It 
is  of  course  possible  that  the  second  Gospel  is  the  work  of 
a  later  writer  incorporating  an  earlier  work  of  Mark,  as  Von 
Soden  and  Schurer  think,  but  the  uniformity  of  style  makes 
it  more  probable  that  we  have  to  do  with  the  same  author 


FOREWORD  13 

throughout."  *  What  he  says  of  the  Gospel  according  to 
Mark  seems  to  us  to  be  equally  true  of  the  Gospels  accord- 
ing to  Matthew  and  Luke. 

We  agree  with  Zahn  when  he  asserts,  "An  oral  tradition 
which  was  accepted  so  early  and  so  universally  by  friend  and 
foe  alike,  as  was  the  tradition  that  the  Gospels  used  by  the 
church  were  written  by  the  apostles  Matthew  and  John, 
and  by  Mark  and  Luke,  the  disciples  of  the  apostles,  must 
have  arisen  from  actual  facts,  because  there  is  nothing  in  the 
books  themselves  which  would  necessarily  have  given  rise 
to  the  unanimous  tradition  regarding  their  authors,"  ^  and 
again:  "It  follows,  therefore,  that  the  tradition  associated 
with  the  four  Gospels  from  the  time  when  they  began  to  cir- 
culate, and  which  was  not  attacked  during  the  entire  period 
from  70-170  even  by  hostile  critics,  of  whom  these  books  had 
no  lack  even  at  this  early  date,  is  based,  not  upon  learned 
conjectures,  but  upon  facts  which  at  that  time  were  incon- 
trovertible." 2 

Of  course  the  titles  to  our  Gospels  were  not  affixed  by 
the  authors  themselves,  but,  as  Henry  Latimer  Jackson  has 
said :  "Those  who  prefixed  the  titles  regarded,  and  meant  to 
indicate,  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John  as  authors  of  the 
works  which  set  forth  the  one  Gospel.  .  .  .  The  tradition 
of  the  names  of  the  authors  comes  to  us  from  a  very  early 
time,  and  it  would  be  uncritical  to  abandon  an  early  and 
continuous  tradition  of  this  kind,  unless  good  reason  could 
be  given  for  doing  so."  *  Such  good  reason  thus  far  has  not 
been  produced  by  the  most  strenuous  eflFort  of  the  most 
venturesome  criticism.  Therefore,  we  have  proceeded  upon 
the  basis  of  the  trustworthiness  of  the  traditional  ascription 
of  authorship  in  these  books  and  our  own  studies  have 
tended  to  establish  this  trustworthiness  only  the  more  firmly 

*  Peake,  A  Critical  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  p.  121. 
*Zahn,  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  vol.  ii,  p.  391. 
*Zahn,  op.  cit.,  p.  392. 

*  Cambridge  Biblical  Essays,  p.  427. 


14  FOREWORD 

in  our  own  faith.  These  men  speak  too  plainly  through 
their  writings  for  anyone  to  fail  to  recognize  their  voices 
unless  his  ears  already  are  filled  with  the  din  of  the  mutually 
destructive  contentions  of  chronic  criticism.  When  the 
books  are  allowed  to  speak  for  themselves  their  testimony 
seems  clear. 

It  remains  only  to  say  that  most  of  the  material  found  in 
the  discussion  of  the  third  Gospel  and  of  the  synoptic  prob- 
lem already  has  appeared  in  print  and  is  reproduced  in  re- 
vised form  in  this  volume  with  the  permission  of  the  publish- 
ers. It  is  in  the  hope  that  the  readers  of  this  book  will  find 
it  a  real  help  in  their  study  of  the  synoptic  Gospels  and  the 
book  of  Acts  that  we  now  send  it  out  with  the  prayer  that  it 
may  increase  the  knowledge  of  and  the  reverence  for  and  the 
delight  in  this  portion  of  the  New  Testament  revelation  of 
the  grace  of  our  God. 


PART  I 

THE  MOST  IMPORTANT  BOOK  EVER 
WRITTEN" :  THE  GOSPEL  ACCORD- 
ING TO  MATTHEW 


PART  I 

♦THE  MOST  IMPORTANT  BOOK  EVER 
WRITTEN" :  THE  GOSPEL  ACCORD- 
ING TO  MATTHEW 

I.  Some  Estimates  of  the  First  Gospel 

1.  Renan  said  that  the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew  was 
"the  most  important  book  of  Christendom,  the  most  im- 
portant book  which  has  ever  been  written."  ^ 

2.  We  find  this  conclusion  confirmed  by  a  more  recent 
authority.  Jiilicher,  in  his  Introduction  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment, says:  "Certainly,  Matthew  has  become  the  most  im- 
portant book  ever  written.  ...  It  has  exerted  its  enor- 
mous influence  upon  the  church  because  it  was  written  by  a 
man  who  bore  within  himself  the  spirit  of  the  growing 
Church  Universal,  and  who,  free  from  all  party  interests, 
knew  how  to  write  a  catholic  Gospel ;  that  is  to  say,  a  Gospel 
destined  and  fitted  for  all  manner  of  believers."  2 

3.  This  catholicity  of  its  spirit  has  impressed  a  still  more 
recent  writer,  and  has  led  him  to  a  similar  conclusion  con- 
cerning the  relative  importance  of  this  Gospel.  Von  Soden 
declares,  "It  points  onward  to  the  development  toward 
Catholicism;  hence  it  became  the  chief  Gospel,  the  work 
which  took  the  lead  in  guiding  this  development,  and  in  so 
far  no  book  ever  written  is  of  greater  historical  import- 
ance." ^  Others  have  spoken  in  equally  unmeasured  terms 
of  praise  of  this  book. 

4.  Zahn  declares:  "In  greatness  of  conception,  and  in  the 

'  Les  Evangiles,  p.  212. 

*  Jiilicher,  Einleitung,  p.  314. 

•Von  Soden,  History  of  Early  Christian  Literature,  p.  199. 

17 


i8       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

power  with  which  a  mass  of  material  is  subordinated  to 
great  ideas,  no  writing  in  either  Testament,  dealing  with  a 
historical  theme,  is  to  be  compared  with  Matthew.  In  this 
respect  the  present  writer  would  be  at  a  loss  to  find  its  equal 
also  in  the  other  literature  of  antiquity."  ^ 

5.  Keim,  after  calling  our  first  Gospel  "a  grand  old  granitic 
book,"  says  that  we  find  in  it  "the  simple  grandeur  of  monu- 
mental writing,  antique  history,  immeasurably  effective  be- 
cause it  is  nature  itself,  because  it  does  not  aim  at  being 
effective."  ^ 

6.  Dean  Farrar  repeats  this  in  a  characteristic  paragraph. 
He  declares  that  "the  book  carries  with  it  internal  evidence 
of  its  own  sacredness.  How  could  the  unlettered  Galilaean 
publican  have  written  unaided  a  book  so  'immeasurably 
effective'?  How  could  he  have  sketched  out  a  tragedy 
which,  by  the  simple  divineness  of  its  theme,  dwarfs  the 
greatest  of  all  earthly  tragedies?  How  could  he  have  com- 
posed a  Passion  music  which,  from  the  flutelike  strains  of 
its  sweet  overture  to  the  'multitudinous  chorale'  of  its  close, 
accumulates  with  unflagging  power  the  mightiest  elements 
of  pathos  and  of  grandeur?  Why  would  the  world  lose  less 
from  the  loss  of  Hamlet,  and  the  Divina  Commedia,  and  the 
Paradise  Lost  together,  than  from  the  loss  of  this  brief  book 
of  the  despised  Galilaean?  Because  this  book  is  due  not  to 
genius,  but  to  revelation ;  not  to  art,  but  to  truth. 

"The  words  of  the  man  are  nothing,  save  as  they  are  the 
record  of  the  manifestation  of  God.  The  greatness  of  the 
work  lay,  not  in  the  writer,  but  in  Him  of  whom  he  wrote ; 
and  in  this,  that  without  art,  without  style,  without  rhetoric, 
in  perfect  and  unconscious  simplicity,  he  sets  forth  the  facts 
as  they  were.  He  is  'immeasurably  effective'  because  he 
nowhere  aims  at  effectiveness.  He  thought  of  nothing  less. 
Though  we  find  in  his  book  the  'simple  grandeur  of  monu- 
mental writing,'  he  brought  to  his  work  but  three  intellec- 

*  Zahn,  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  vol.  ii,  p.  556. 
''Keim,  Jesus  of  Nazara,  i,  p.  yz- 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW         19 

tual  endowments :  the  love  of  truth,  an  exquisite  sensibility  to 
the  mercy  of  God  and  the  misery  of  man,  and  a  deep  sense 
of  that  increasing  purpose  which  runs  through  the  ages. 
And  thus  endowed  by  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God,  he  has  given 
us  this  unique  History,  so  genuinely  human,  and  therefore, 
in  all  its  parts,  so  genuinely  divine;  a  mighty,  because  a 
simply  truthful,  record  of  the  words  and  deeds  of  Him  who 
was  both  God  and  man."  ^ 

We  may  not  be  ready  to  agree  with  any  of  these  estimates, 
taken  as  a  whole,  and  yet  they  may  be  sufficient  to  convince 
us  that  the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew  is  a  most  notable 
book,  according  to  the  judgment  of  most  able  and  competent 
authorities,  a  book  worthy  of  our  study  in  any  detail,  and  a 
book  whose  author  must  have  been  a  most  notable  man. 
All  ancient  times  agreed  that  the  author  was  Matthew,  and 
all  modem  efforts  to  disprove  the  unanimous  testimony  of 
antiquity  have  fallen  far  short  of  conclusiveness.  Therefore 
we  begin  our  study  with  some  notice  of  this  man. 

n.  Matthew 

I.  His  Name.  His  name  was  Levi,  ''V.;  but  this  original 
Hebrew  name,  recorded  in  Mark  2.  14  and  Luke  5.  27,  seems 
to  have  been  replaced  after  his  call  into  the  discipleship  of 
Jesus  with  the  new  name  "Matthew,"  Maddalog,  from  the 
Hebrew  ""J^P!?  or  S^^f?'^,  equivalent  to  the  Greek  Geodwpo?, 
Theodore  or  Theodoretus  or  Dorotheus  or  Adeodatus,  and 
meaning  "the  gift  of  Jehovah,"  or  "the  gift  of  God." 

At  the  time  of  his  call  Simon  was  given  his  new  name 
Cephas  or  Peter,'^  and  this  new  name  displaced  the  old  in 
the  usage  and  memory  of  the  Christian  Church.  Saul,  the 
greatest  persecutor  of  the  early  church,  became  the  greatest 
apostle  in  that  church ;  and  the  church  came  to  know  him  by 
a  new  name,  Paul.    Here  is  another  apostle  to  whom  a  new 


•Messages  of  the  Books,  pp.  47,  48. 
'John  1.  42. 


20       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

name  is  given  as  he  enters  the  apostolate ;  and  the  new  name 
has  so  far  displaced  the  old  that  the  old  name  is  well- 
nigh  forgotten  in  the  church  of  to-day.  It  is  fitting  that  the 
first  book  of  our  canon  of  the  New  Covenant,  the  first  book 
of  our  New  Testament,  should  be  written  by  a  man  with  a 
new  name.  This  is  not  a  Levitical  revelation,  a  Gospel 
according  to  Levi.  That  belonged  to  the  Old  Testament. 
This  is  the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew,  the  Gospel  of  the 
new  name  to  be  given  to  every  Christian,^  the  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  the  new  Gift  of  God.  Our  New  Testament  is  begun 
by  this  man  with  the  new  name. 

2.  His  Relationships,  (i)  In  Mark  2.  14  we  read  that 
Levi  was  the  son  of  Alphseus.  In  Mark  3.  18,  in  the  list  of 
the  apostles,  Matthew's  name  occurs,  followed  by  that  of 
Thomas  and  then  by  that  of  James  the  Less ;  and  James  is 
said  to  be  the  son  of  Alphseus.  If  this  Alphaeus  is  the  same 
as  the  one  mentioned  in  the  preceding  chapter,  it  follows  that 
Matthew  and  James  the  Less  were  brothers.  This  relation- 
ship seems  probable,  at  least.  In  Mark  15.  40  Mary  is  said 
to  be  the  mother  of  James  the  Less.  Mary  then  is  the 
mother  of  Matthew. 

(2)  We  notice  that  in  Mark's  list  of  the  apostles  the  name 
of  Thomas  comes  between  the  names  of  these  two  brothers. 
We  notice  further  that  in  all  of  the  synoptical  lists  of  the 
apostles^  the  names  of  Matthew  and  Thomas  are  joined  to 
form  the  fourth  pair;  and  of  the  three  preceding  pairs  we 
know  that  two,  Peter  and  Andrew,  and  James  and  John, 
were  paired  because  they  were  brothers.  We  find,  again, 
that  in  John  11.  16  and  21.  2,  Thomas  is  called  Didymus  or 
The  Twin.  Why  was  he  called  The  Twin?  Whose  twin 
was  he  ?  It  lies  at  hand  to  say  that  he  was  Matthew's  twin 
brother.  Then  we  understand  why  he  always  is  named  with 
Matthew  in  the  synoptical  lists,  and  why  his  name  should 
follow  that  of  Matthew  and  precede  that  of  James,  who 

"  Rev.  2.  17. 

'  Mark  3.  18 ;  Matt.  10.  3 ;  Luke  6.  15. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        21 

was  Matthew's  brother.  Thomas  was  the  brother  of  James 
the  Less  and  the  twin  brother  of  Matthew;  and  therefore 
he  was  called  Thomas  Didymus,  or  Thomas  the  Twin.  Then 
three  of  the  twelve  apostles  were  own  brothers,  Matthew, 
Thomas,  and  James  the  Less;  and  two  of  these  were  twin 
brothers,  Matthew  and  Thomas  Didymus.i*^ 

It  may  be  that  we  have  not  yet  exhausted  the  possible 
relationships  suggested  for  Matthew  in  the  New  Testament. 
(3)  In  Mark  15.  40  we  read  that  among  the  women  behold- 
ing the  crucifixion  were  "Mary  Magdalene,  and  Mary  the 
mother  of  James  the  Less  and  of  Joses,  and  Salome."  In 
John  19.  25  we  find  it  stated  that  "there  were  standing  by 
the  cross  of  Jesus  his  mother,  and  his  mother's  sister,  Mary 
the  wife  of  Clopas,  and  Mary  Magdalene."  Was  the  mother 
of  James  the  Less  and  of  Matthew  this  sister  of  the  mother 
of  Jesus?  Church  tradition  said  that  Matthew  was  a  kins- 
man of  Jesus.ii  Could  it  be  that  Matthew's  mother  was 
Mary's  sister,  and  that  Matthew  and  Jesus  were  cousins? 
This  does  not  seem  to  us  very  probable.  We  will  be  content 
to  believe  that  it  is  possible  that  Alphaeus  was  the  father  of 
Matthew,  and  Mary  his  mother,  and  Thomas  his  twin 
brother,  and  James  the  Less  his  younger  brother,  and  that 
Joses  was  a  brother  possibly  younger  still. 

It  is  just  possible  that  "Joses"  was  another  name  for 
"Thomas."  He  may  have  had  two  names  as  well  as 
Matthew.  It  is  barely  possible  that  Mary  the  mother  of 
Jesus  had  a  sister  named  Mary  who  was  the  mother  of  these 
three  or  four  boys.  But  the  likelihood  that  there  were  two 
sisters  both  named  Mary  is  so  precarious  that  we  do  not 
give  it  much  credence.  If  these  brothers  were  not  cousins 
of  Jesus,  they  were  his  fellow  townsmen  at  Capernaum. 
They  probably  were  well  acquainted  with  Jesus  and  his 
family,  as  well  as  with  those  other  brother-pairs,  Peter  and 
Andrew,  and  James  and  John.    With  these  they  must  have 

'•  So  Weiss  concludes,  Leben  Jesu,  vol.  ii,  pp.  80,  81. 
"  Farrar,  The  Messages  of  the  Books,  p.  29. 


22       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

formed  a  very  compact  group  of  friends  and  fellow  towns- 
men in  the  apostolate. 

3.  His  Biography.  The  New  Testament  tells  us  nothing 
more  about  Matthew  except  the  account  of  his  call  and  the 
feast  in  connection  with  it.^^  Save  in  the  apostolic  lists  his 
name  never  occurs  again  in  the  sacred  book.  All  we  know 
of  him  we  must  gather  from  these  short  paragraphs.  Since 
our  sources  of  information  are  so  meager,  we  will  look  at 
these  paragraphs  in  detail.  We  notice  first  Matthew's  own 
account  of  his  call.  "And  as  Jesus  passed  by  from  thence, 
he  saw  a  man,  called  Matthew,  sitting  at  the  place  of  toll: 
and  he  saith  unto  him,  Follow  me.  And  he  arose,  and  fol- 
lowed him."  13 

With  the  simplicity  and  the  brevity  characteristic  of  these 
Gospels  the  whole  of  this  wonderful  narrative  is  crowded 
into  these  two  sentences — "Jesus  saw  the  publican  Matthew, 
and  said  to  him,  Follow  me,"  and  "Matthew  the  pubHcan 
left  all  and  followed  him."  What  a  simple  transaction  that 
seems  to  be,  and  yet  what  a  marvelous  occurrence  it  really 
was !  No  wonder  that  Matthew  makes  it,  even  though  it  be 
in  this  very  abbreviated  form,  a  matter  of  record  in  his  Gos- 
pel, for  it  is  the  very  heart  of  the  Gospel  to  him.  The  mo- 
ment set  before  us  here  was  the  crisis  moment  of  his  life.  It 
meant  moral  redemption  to  him ;  it  meant  eternal  salvation  to 
him ;  it  meant  everything  to  him.  It  was  the  moment  of  de- 
cision between  light  and  darkness,  life  and  death,  heaven  and 
hell.  His  immortal  destiny  for  one  moment  hung  wavering. 
A  divine  voice  came  crashing  in  upon  his  soul,  unexpectedly, 
in  the  very  midst  of  his  business.  For  a  moment  he  may  have 
been  bewildered,  hesitant ;  or  there  may  not  have  been  even 
a  moment's  delay.  He  rose  to  his  feet,  cast  one  swift  glance 
around  upon  his  belongings,  deliberately  turned  his  back 
upon  them;  and  leaving  all  his  chances  of  worldly  prefer- 
ment and  all  his  sinful  past  behind  him,  he  faced  toward 

"Matt.  9.  9-19;  Mark  2.  14-22;  Luke  5.  27-39. 
"  Matt.  9-  9- 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        23 

Jesus  and  followed  after  him.  That  was  all,  but  that  was 
everything.  Matthew  followed  the  Lord  through  life, 
through  death,  and  through  the  infinite  heights  of  heaven. 
He  sits  on  one  of  the  twelve  thrones  there  to-day. 

Let  us  look  at  this  Jew  as  he  sits  there  at  the  place  of  toll, 
while  Jesus  is  approaching  him,  coming  down  the  Caper- 
naum road  toward  the  tax-receiver's  booth.  Matthew  is  a 
man  of  strong  personal  character,  capable  of  standing  alone 
if  need  be  against  all  the  popular  tides  of  the  time.  For 
financial  or  other  reasons  he  has  chosen  to  cut  himself  off 
from  his  people,  and  to  ally  himself  with  the  hated  and 
despised  class  of  publicans  or  taxgatherers,  many  of  them 
the  tools  of  the  foreigners,  the  representatives  of  the  Roman 
conquerors,  hated  more  than  the  Romans  themselves  because 
they  were  renegade  Jews,  traitors  to  the  cause  of  home  rule, 
political  apostates  instead  of  patriots,  Matthew  himself  is 
in  the  employ  of  Herod  Antipas;  and  his  place  of  toll  stands 
at  the  point  where  the  great  Damascus  road  enters  the  ter- 
ritory of  Herod,  at  the  northern  end  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee. 
He  sits  there  at  his  desk  with  firm-set  mouth  and  gloomy 
brow ;  and  his  fellow-countrymen  come  to  pay  their  un- 
willing tribute,  cursing  the  rule  of  Herod  Antipas  in  their 
hearts  and  utterly  despising  this  Jew  who  has  so  far  forgot- 
ten his  loyalty  to  his  own  nation  as  to  lend  himself  to  the 
oppressor's  aid.  They  treat  him  with  the  contempt  they  feel 
he  deserves ;  and  Matthew,  as  stifT-necked  and  proud-hearted 
as  they,  resents  their  demeanor  and  exacts  the  last  farthing 
of  tribute  they  owe. 

It  was  something  like  the  state  of  affairs  in  the  American 
colonies  when  they  were  preparing  for  the  Declaration  of 
Independence  and  the  American  Revolution.  The  Stamp 
Act  had  been  passed  by  the  English  P'arliament;  and  it  was 
to  go  into  effect  on  the  first  day  of  November,  1765.  All  the 
colonies  were  aroused  into  intense  indignation;  and  they 
declared  that  taxation  without  representation  was  tyranny 
unendurable.    When  the  first  day  of  November  arrived,  an 


24       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

excited  mob  of  patriots  surrounded  the  house  of  the  acting- 
governor  of  New  York,  Cadwalleder  Golden,  and  demanded 
that  he  deliver  up  to  them  all  the  stamped  paper  forwarded 
him  from  England  in  preparation  for  the  levying  of  the  tax ; 
but  Cadwalleder  Colden  had  a  will  of  his  own.  He  was 
there  as  the  servant  and  the  representative  of  the  king,  and 
he  refused  to  accede  to  their  demand.  Then  all  the  hatred 
of  the  mob  vented  itself  upon  him,  and  they  hung  him  in 
effigy  and  they  burned  his  fine  coach  near  the  present  Bowl- 
ing Green  and  they  threw  the  effigy  into  the  bonfire.  It 
must  have  been  something  of  the  same  feeling  which  the 
intensely  patriotic  Jews  cherished  toward  such  men  as 
Matthew,  the  taxgatherers  of  the  tyranny  against  which  the 
whole  nation  was  ripening  for  revolt. 

It  was  something  as  if,  on  Sherman's  march  to  the  sea, 
when  the  Union  troops  had  taken  possession  of  a  town,  some 
Southerner,  born  and  bred  in  the  South,  had  suddenly 
espoused  the  cause  of  the  Federal  troops,  had  opened  his 
house  for  the  entertainment  of  the  officers,  and  had 
assisted  in  foraging  expeditions  and  had  made  himself  offi- 
cious in  pointing  out  the  place  where  there  were  hidden  and 
abundant  supplies.  The  Southerners  would  have  hated  the 
Yankee  soldiers  in  all  probability ;  but  their  intensest  hatred 
would  have  been  reserved  for  their  renegade  brother,  who 
ought  to  have  stood  with  them  but  who  had  chosen  to  ally 
himself  with  the  enemy  instead.  They  would  have  felt  like 
treating  him  to  a  coat  of  tar  and  feathers  and  riding  him 
out  of  town  on  a  rail  as  soon  as  the  troops  were  gone.  Can 
we  imagine  some  Belgian  currying  favor  with  the  German 
conquerors  in  Antwerp  and  giving  them  his  assistance  and 
service  in  the  collection  of  the  taxes  imposed  upon  his  coun- 
trymen? Can  we  imagine  how  the  Belgian  patriots  would 
regard  such  a  man?  In  the  same  way  the  Jewish  publican 
was  a  turncoat,  a  political  apostate,  a  renegade,  a  traitor; 
and  his  hand  was  against  every  man  and  every  man's  hand 
was  against  him. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        25 

It  was  a  hard  life  the  Jewish  publican  led.  He  was  a 
lawbreaker  by  the  very  necessities  of  his  occupation,  an  out- 
cast from  his  people,  an  alien  to  his  own  nation,  a  profes- 
sional Sabbath-breaker  with  the  Gentiles,  and  yet  a  Jew.  He 
was  despised  by  those  whom  he  served  and  despised  still 
more  by  those  whom  he  helped  to  oppress.  He  often  must 
have  wished  to  be  free  from  hjs  task,  since  every  day  was  so 
filled  with  annoyances  and  unpleasantnesses;  but  there  was 
no  hope  of  release.  The  publican  had  crossed  the  Rubicon, 
and  there  was  no  turning  back.  The  shadow  of  his  crime 
rested  heavily  upon  him  henceforth  through  life.  He  was 
banished  from  his  brethren,  socially,  politically,  religiously 
ostracized  by  them  as  long  as  he  lived. 

However,  strange  things  had  been  happening  here  in 
Capernaum.  One  of  Matthew's  fellow  townsmen  had  begun 
to  show  himself  very  different  from  his  neighbors  in  every- 
thing. He  was  different  from  them  in  spirit  and  life,  in 
speech  and  behavior.  He  was  full  of  love,  instead  of  hate; 
full  of  gentleness,  forbearance,  forgiveness,  instead  of 
haughtiness,  exclusiveness,  and  contempt.  He  had  a  place  in 
his  heart  for  the  weary  and  the  heavy-laden,  the  publican 
and  the  sinner,  the  outcast  and  the  lost;  and  he  was  a  man  of 
mighty  power.  He  had  opened  blind  eyes  and  restored 
palsied  limbs.  He  had  done  more  than  that;  he  had  cured 
the  leprosy,  and  that  was  an  incurable  disease.  The  fame 
of  these  things  had  spread  through  the  land.  The  population 
of  Capernaum  was  amazed  beyond  measure,  and  they  said, 
"We  never  saw  it  on  this  fashion;  what  new  thing  is  this 
which  has  appeared  in  our  midst?" 

Matthew  had  been  amazed  with  the  rest.  He  had  heard 
of  these  wonders ;  and  he  may  have  seen  some  of  them  with 
his  own  eyes.  He  doubtless  had  listened  to  this  fellow 
townsman  and  his  heart  had  been  impressed  with  the  con- 
viction that  this  man  spake  as  never  man  spake  before  him 
and  that  he  had  in  him  a  power  and  an  authority  which 
were  divine.     He  had  sat  there  at  the  place  of  toll  day 


26       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

after  day  and  had  pondered  these  things  within  him;  and 
he  had  chafed  under  the  heavy  burden  of  his  nation's  repro- 
bation which  his  self-chosen  occupation  had  imposed  upon 
him;  and  he  had  heartily  wished  himself  free  from  it  all. 
He  even  had  wondered  if  this  gospel  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
might  not  be  for  him ;  if,  in  following  this  new  Teacher,  he 
might  not  find  his  way  back  into  happiness  and  peace  and 
heaven.  It  may  have  been  weeks  or  months  that  he  had 
been  under  conviction,  the  certainty  growing  within  him  that 
this  Jesus  could  give  him  a^  his  heart  desired;  and  to-day, 
as  he  looked  down  the  road  and  saw  the  Wonder-worker 
approaching,  his  heart  beat  fast  with  vague  anticipation, 
for  somehow  or  other  he  felt  that  the  crisis  of  his  life  had 
come. 

A  publican  who  was  passing  by  may  have  halted  for  one 
moment  at  the  booth  and  said  to  him:  "Matthew,  have  you 
heard  the  latest  news?  This  Jesus  has  been  teaching  up 
here  in  the  town ;  and  a  great  multitude  thronged  the  whole 
house  where  he  was.  There  were  Pharisees  and  doctors  of 
divinity  all  the  way  from  Jerusalem  and  out  of  every  town 
of  Galilee  and  Judaea,  such  a  crowd  as  Capernaum  has  not 
seen  in  many  a  day;  and  four  friends  brought  a  man  sick 
of  the  palsy  and  stretched  out  at  full  length  on  his  couch,  in 
the  hope  that  this  Jesus  might  heal  him.  They  could  not 
get  in ;  the  house  was  packed  close,  and  the  doorways  were 
jammed  full  of  the  people;  and  what  did  they  do  but  climb 
up  to  the  roof  and  make  a  hole  in  the  tiling  and  let  the 
palsied  man  down  from  above  with  ropes!  You  ought  to 
have  seen  the  astonishment  of  the  crowd  inside ;  the  doctors 
of  divinity  all  frowned  at  this  unusual  procedure. 

"Jesus  looked  at  the  man  in  all  calmness  imaginable,  and 
told  him  that  his  sins  were  forgiven  him.  Then  a  murmur 
of  indignation  ran  round  the  whole  circle  of  scribes  and 
Pharisees  and  doctors,  and  they  all  said  that  that  was  pure 
blasphemy;  but  the  Teacher  turned  on  them,  and  his  eyes 
flashed  a  little  as  he  smiled  in  his  own  quiet  way,  and  he 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        27 

said  to  them,  'You  do  not  believe  me  when  I  tell  you  that 
this  man's  sins  are  forgiven  him ;  would  you  believe  me  if  I 
said  to  you  that  his  strength  was  restored?  I  will  compel 
your  faith  that  far  at  least.  You  must  believe  what  your 
own  eyes  see  for  themselves.'  Then  he  said  to  the  palsied 
man,  'Rise  up,  and  walk !'  and  the  palsied  man  stood  up  and 
took  his  bed  on  his  back,  and  the  crowds  parted  before  him 
as  they  would  have  shrunk  away  from  a  ghost,  and  he 
walked  away  through  them  and  went  straight  to  his  home! 
And  the  people  are  all  saying,  'Israel  never  saw  anything 
like  it  before ;  we  beHeve  that  this  man  can  do  anything  he 
says  he  can  do,  even  to  the  forgiveness  of  sins.'  " 

Matthew  listened,  and  in  the  depths  of  his  own  heart  he 
said :  "I  believe.  He  can  forgive  sins.  The  power  of  God 
is  with  him.  I  wish  I  could  be  with  him  too."  Then  he 
heard  the  commotion  of  the  multitude  approaching  down 
the  road,  and  he  looked  out  and  saw  the  Master  at  the  head 
of  the  throng;  and  there  was  an  unutterable  longing  within 
him  to  cut  loose  from  this  business  and  to  leave  all  his  past 
life  behind  him  forever,  and  there  was  a  vague  yearning  for 
something  better  and  higher,  something  nobler  and  more 
satisfying;  and  it  was  all  apparent  in  his  eager  face,  as  he 
saw  the  Master  coming  up  and  going  by.  The  Master  saw 
him;  and  he  paused  for  one  moment  and  looked  into  the 
depths  of  this  man's  heart  through  the  depths  of  his  eye,  and 
he  saw  that  this  heart  was  prepared  for  apostleship.  Then 
the  Master  said,  "Matthew,  follow  me!"  And  Matthew 
arose,  left  all,  and  followed  him.  The  die  was  cast ;  the  deci- 
sion was  made  for  time  and  for  eternity.  That  was  the  be- 
ginning of  lifelong  discipleship  and  then  of  eternal  beati- 
tude.   Matthew  follows  the  Master  to-day. 

Do  we  realize  how  wonderful  it  was,  not  that  Matthew 
followed  the  Lord,  but  that  the  Lord  asked  Matthew  to 
follow  him?  It  was  putting  his  then  popular  cause  under 
the  popular  ban.  If  he  added  to  his  intimate  associates  a 
publican,  a  taxgatherer,  a  renegade,  an  apostate,  making 


28       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

him  one  of  the  apostolic  twelve,  it  would  arouse  inevitably 
the  prejudice  of  the  whole  Jewish  nation  against  him,  and 
it  would  endanger  seriously  the  success  of  his  cause.  Our 
Lord  never  paid  any  attention  to  the  maxims  of  merely 
worldly  wisdom.  He  looked  only  at  the  heart,  and  he  cared 
nothing  for  the  past  history.  He  was  absolutely  indifferent 
to  antecedents,  external  connections,  or  social  position.  All 
that  he  asked  was  the  faith  which  would  follow  him. 

Matthew  had  that  faith,  and  that  settled  the  matter  with 
Jesus.  All  disciples  looked  alike  to  him.  They  all  looked 
good  to  him,  if  they  were  good  disciples.  If  they  were  ready 
to  obey  and  follow  his  command,  he  asked  nothing  about 
their  past  occupation  or  their  present  social  standing.  .God 
was  no  respecter  of  persons.  In  the  kingdom  of  God  which 
he  had  come  to  proclaim  religious  privileges  were  to  be  free 
to  all  alike.  Rich  and  poor,  Pharisee  and  publican,  priest 
and  prostitute  were  equally  welcome.  They  must  come  in 
on  the  same  terms  and  then  they  could  share  and  share  alike. 

In  all  probability  Matthew  thoroughly  understood  this 
attitude  of  the  Master,  for  he  immediately  determined  to 
celebrate  the  close  of  his  career  as  a  publican  and  the  begin- 
ning of  his  new  life  as  a  disciple  with  a  great  feast  in  his 
own  home,  and  he  invited  all  of  his  old  friends  to  this  feast, 
all  the  publicans  and  the  sinners  of  the  town ! 

Most  likely  Jesus  never  had  seen  so  many  disreputable 
characters,  brought  together  under  one  roof  and  sitting  at 
one  table,  before;  but  he  did  not  hesitate  one  moment  to  take 
his  place  at  the  table  with  them.  It  was  one  of  the  happiest 
occasions  of  his  life.  Here  was  a  disciple  capable  of  a 
whole-hearted  surrender  of  everything  to  the  cause ;  and  his 
house  and  all  his  resources  were  placed  at  the  Master's  dis- 
posal to-day.  Here  was  a  company  of  social  outcasts, 
hungry  of  heart  and  eager  for  help  some  of  them,  and  all  of 
them  needing  the  assurance  of  the  Father's  love  and  of  the 
Great  Physician's  ability  and  willingness  to  heal  them  of 
their  hurt. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        29 

There  across  the  table  was  a  man  of  evil  countenance, 
bent  only  upon  gorging  himself  with  all  the  good  things 
placed  within  his  reach.  Could  a  word  be  spoken  to  that 
glutton  which  would  arouse  him  to  some  perception  of 
higher  things?  There  at  the  far  end  of  the  line  was  that 
woman  of  the  gaudy  raiment  and  the  painted  face  and  the 
painfully  conciliating  smile.  Surely  she  had  a  good  heart, 
hidden  behind  that  courtesan  exterior.  Surely  she  was 
capable  of  great  devotion;  she  could  love,  if  she  had  a 
chance,  if  she  ever  found  any  man  who  was  not  a  beast. 

It  was  such  an  opportunity  as  Jesus  constantly  coveted. 
He  reclined  at  the  table  and  quietly  talked  about  the  good 
things  of  the  Kingdom  and  the  manifold  proof  of  the 
Father's  immeasurable  love.  At  last  every  eye  was  fastened 
upon  him  and  every  ear  was  attentive  to  his  speech.  At  last 
the  hard  hearts  began  to  throb  with  new  hope,  even  while 
the  flush  of  shame  mounted  into  faces  long  unused  to  blush- 
ing but  accustomed  to  brazening  it  out  in  the  sight  of  the 
world. 

Jesus  talked  on ;  and  the  glutton  stopped  swilling  his  wine 
and  listened  until  he  loathed  himself  and  all  his  past  life, 
and  he  said  to  his  own  soul :  "I  am  one  of  the  swine,  and  I 
have  lived  swinishly  all  my  days.  I  have  given  most  of  my 
thought  to  my  meat  and  my  drink ;  but  here  is  a  man  whose 
meat  and  whose  drink  it  is  to  do  the  will  of  the  Father  who 
sent  him.  Other  men  have  despised  me  and  called  me  a  sot. 
This  man  does  not  hesitate  to  cast  his  pearls  before  me, 
even  though  he  must  have  seen  at  this  very  table  that  I  sat 
among  the  swine  and  was  fain  to  fill  myself  with  the  swine's 
meat.  In  the  presence  of  his  temperance  I  come  to  myself. 
I  realize  that  I  am  capable  of  better,  much  better,  things. 
I  will  arise  and  come  to  this  Father  of  whom  he  speaks. 
Henceforth  I  will  seek  first  the  kingdom  of  God  and  his 
righteousness  as  long  as  I  live."  Jesus  saw  the  light  of  a 
new  manhood  suddenly  flash  into  that  man's  eye,  and  his 
soul  rejoiced  at  the  sight. 


30       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

He  talked  on,  and  a  hush  fell  upon  the  whole  assembly, 
and  many  held  their  breath  in  tense  expectation,  for  it 
seemed  that  God  and  heaven  had  drawn  very  near.  That 
woman  who  was  a  sinner  burst  into  sobbing,  and  the  hot 
tears  plowed  their  way  as  through  furrows  of  paint  down 
her  cheeks.  She  hid  her  face  in  her  mantle  and  there  she 
vowed  within  her  own  soul:  "I  will  take  all  my  ill-gotten 
gains  and  I  will  purchase  with  them  an  alabaster  cruse  of 
precious  ointment;  and  I  will  watch  my  opportunity  and 
some  time  I  will  pour  it  all  out  at  his  feet.  It  will  be  my  inex- 
pressible libation  to  Purity,  incarnate  in  him  and  enthroned 
henceforth  in  my  heart.  It  will  be  the  symbol  of  my  infinite 
abhorrence  of  the  past  and  my  uttermost  devotion  to  the 
pure  and  the  good.  He  will  not  refuse  the  gift.  He  will 
not  spurn  it  as  the  product  of  tainted  wealth.  He  will  accept 
it  as  his  due.  He  will  love  me  freely,  even  as  the  Father 
loves.  He  will  forgive  my  many  sins,  and  I  will  go  in  peace 
to  live  a  life  which  is  pure  and  clean." 

Jesus  saw  the  tears,  and  his  soul  rejoiced  in  the  sight;  and 
he  said :  "Repentance  and  faith  are  all  He  requires  to  enter 
in.  Matthew  has  begun  the  new  life  to-day,  and  he  celebrates 
the  event  with  this  feast.  He  has  left  all  to  follow  me ;  and 
he  invites  you,  all  of  you,  to  join  with  him  in  this  new  alle- 
giance. This  house  is  the  very  sanctuary  of  the  Most  High. 
To-day  it  has  become  the  birthplace  of  souls.  This  feast 
may  be  a  foretaste  of  the  marriage  supper  of  the  Lamb,  for 
the  Bridegroom  is  here,  and  in  more  than  one  soul  the  bride 
is  making  herself  ready." 

It  was  indeed  a  joyous  occasion.  It  would  have  been  diffi- 
cult to  tell  who  was  happiest  in  that  company:  Jesus,  who 
rejoiced  to  see  that  the  Father  was  being  glorified  through 
his  message ;  or  the  souls  who  were  looking  for  the  first  time 
into  the  Father's  reconciled  face ;  or  Matthew,  whose  heart's 
desire  was  being  accomplished  in  the  homage  paid  to  his 
Master  and  in  the  salvation  of  his  friends.  Probably 
Matthew  was  as  happy  as  anybody  else  that  day.    However, 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        31 

there  were  some  people  who  were  not  particularly  pleased. 
Certain  Pharisees  complained  to  his  disciples,  "Why  eat- 
eth  your  Master  with  the  publicans  and  sinners?"  To 
them  Jesus  answered :  "They  that  are  whole  have  no  need 
of  a  physician,  but  they  that  are  sick.  Do  you  find  any 
fault  with  a  physician  because  he  goes  wherever  his  profes- 
sional practice  may  call  him?  Would  you  not  rather  find 
fault  with  him  if  he  refused  to  go  to  minister  to  the  phys- 
ical needs  of  anybody  here?  I  too  have  a  professional  inter- 
est in  these  people.  I  minister  to  sick  souls  as  the  physician 
ministers  to  sick  bodies.  I  have  the  same  right  to  associate 
with  them  which  he  has.  The  well  should  not  complain  that 
the  physician  visits  the  sick." 

Then  he  turned  upon  them  with  one  of  his  favorite  quo- 
tations from  the  Scripture.  He  said,  "Go  ye  and  learn  what 
this  meaneth,  I  desire  mercy,  and  not  sacrifice:  for  I  came 
not  to  call  the  righteous,  but  sinners."  ^^  Matthew  heard, 
and  his  heart  leaped  within  him  as  he  knew  his  old  enemies 
so  well  answered  and  the  Master's  mission  to  himself  and 
his  friends  so  clearly  proclaimed  and  vindicated  before  all 
the  people. 

Then  some  of  the  disciples  of  John  the  Baptist  came  and 
said  in  their  turn :  "What  does  all  this  feasting  mean  ?  It 
is  not  these  people  with  whom  he  feasts  to  whom  we  object, 
but  it  is  the  feasting  itself.  Our  master  taught  us  to  fast, 
and  the  Pharisees  fast  oft.  It  seems  to  us  that  if  Matthew 
is  about  to  begin  a  religious  life,  he  would  do  well  to  begin 
with  fasting  rather  than  feasting.  That  would  be  much 
more  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  and  the  program  of 
John." 

Now,  Matthew  in  all  probability  never  had  been  a  disciple 
of  John  the  Baptist  and,  even  if  he  had  been  among  the 
publicans  who  came  to  John  asking  to  be  baptized,^^  he  had 
prepared  this  feast  of  celebration  and  farewell  without  any 

"  Matt  9.  13. 
"  Luke  3.  12. 


32       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

thought  of  the  Forerunner.  However,  he  knew  that  Jesus 
had  been  baptized  of  John  and  that  he  thought  very  highly 
of  that  ascetic  of  the  wilderness.  Peter  and  Andrew  and 
James  and  John  and  Philip  and  Bartholomew  all  had  been 
disciples  of  John  the  Baptist  before  they  became  disciples 
of  Jesus.  Both  they  and  Matthew  listened  with  great  eager- 
ness to  hear  what  the  Master  would  have  to  say. 

The  answer  of  Jesus  was  a  most  memorable  one. 
Matthew  never  forgot  it.  It  seemed  to  him  to  sum  up  the 
whole  relation  between  the  new  gospel  and  the  old  dispensa- 
tion. It  influenced  his  conception  of  Christianity  to  the  day 
of  his  death.  It  determined  all  unconsciously  to  himself  the 
form  which  his  written  Gospel  would  take  in  the  later  days. 
He  listened,  and  many  things  grew  clear  to  him  as  he  heard 
the  Master  say,  "Can  the  sons  of  the  bridechamber  mourn, 
as  long  as  the  bridegroom  is  with  them?  but  the  days  will 
come,  when  the  bridegroom  shall  be  taken  away  from  them, 
and  then  will  they  fast.  And  no  man  putteth  a  piece  of 
undressed  cloth  upon  an  old  garment ;  for  that  which  should 
fill  it  up  taketh  from  the  garment,  and  a  worse  rent  is  made. 
Neither  do  men  put  new  wine  into  old  wineskins:  else  the 
skins  burst,  and  the  wine  is  spilled,  and  the  skins  perish :  but 
they  put  new  wine  into  fresh  wine-skins,  and  both  are  pre- 
served." ^® 

While  Jesus  was  speaking,  Jairus  came  in,  and  told  Jesus 
his  daughter  had  just  died ;  and  Jesus  rose  to  go  with  him  to 
the  stricken  home.  Thus  the  company  broke  up,  and  the 
feast  ended.  Matthew  went  with  the  Lord ;  and  he  followed 
him  henceforth  as  a  disciple,  and  later  as  an  apostle.  He 
was  present,  of  course,  on  many  or  most  of  the  occasions 
deemed  worthy  of  record  in  our  Gospels;  but  aside  from 
the  apostolical  lists  his  name  never  is  found  again  on  their 
pages. 

He  belongs  in  the  second  group  of  the  apostles.  Peter, 
James,  John,  and  Andrew  form  the  first  group,  and  are 

"Matt.  9.  15-17. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        33 

most  prominent  in  the  gospel  history.  Philip,  Bartholomew, 
Matthew,  and  Thomas  form  the  second  group  of  four;  and 
of  the  other  three  in  this  group  we  hear  again,  and  of  some 
of  them  on  several  occasions.  Matthew  alone  has  no  other 
mention  in  our  New  Testament.  He  was  a  publican  who 
became  an  apostle.  At  the  time  of  his  call  he  gave  a  feast 
in  honor  of  his  new  Master  and  invited  his  old  friends. 
That  is  all  we  are  told  about  him  in  the  Scripture,  and  it  may 
seem  like  a  small  basis  upon  which  to  build  any  sure  concep- 
tion of  his  character.  Before  making  the  attempt  we  notice 
what  church  tradition  has  to  say  of  him. 

4.  Traditions  Concerning  Him.  (i)  Clement  of  Alexan- 
dria wrote  a  manual  of  moral  behavior  for  the  early  Chris- 
tians, and  in  the  chapter  "On  Eating"  he  says  :  "Happiness  is 
found  in  the  practice  of  virtue.  Accordingly,  the  apostle 
Matthew  partook  of  seeds,  and  nuts,  and  vegetables,  with- 
out flesh."  1"  Was  this  because  Matthew  remembered  that 
the  Master  had  said  at  his  feast,  "It  is  all  right  to  feast  now  ; 
but  when  the  bridegroom  is  taken  away  my  disciples  will 
fast"?  Were  his  abstinence  and  his  vegetarianism  a  con- 
stant memorial  of  his  faithfulness  to  every  suggestion  of 
his  Lord  ? 

(2)  In  another  of  his  larger  works  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria has  preserved  one  saying  of  the  apostle  Matthew. 
His  language  is  as  follows :  "They  say  in  the  traditions  that 
Matthew  the  apostle  constantly  said,  that  'if  the  neighbor  of 
an  elect  man  sin,  the  elect  man  has  sinned.  For  had  he  con- 
ducted himself  as  the  Word  prescribes,  his  neighbor  also 
would  have  been  filled  with  such  reverence  for  the  life  he 
led  as  not  to  sin.'  "  ^^ 

There  is  a  deal  of  truth  in  this  saying.  No  Christian  can 
shake  off  all  responsibility  for  the  sin  of  the  community  in 
which  he  lives.  He  dare  not  say :  "It  is  no  affair  of  mine. 
I  have  nothing  to  do  with  it."    The  chances  are,  as  Matthew 

"  Paedag.  II,  i.    Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  ii,  p.  241. 
"Strom.  VII,  13.    Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  ii,  p.  547. 


34       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

said,  that  if  his  life  were  just  what  it  ought  to  be,  it  would 
convict  his  neighbor  of  sin  and  righteousness  and  judgment, 
and  bring  him  to  repentance  and  faith.  When  all  Christians 
are  ideal  Christians  it  will  not  be  long  before  the  world  will 
be  saved.  For  all  delay  in  that  blessed  consummation  the 
Christian  Church  is,  and  always  will  be,  most  largely  re- 
sponsible. 

On  the  other  hand,  things  being  as  they  are  to-day,  the 
holiest  life  will  not  be  uniformly  successful  in  evangelism. 
Jesus  himself  did  not  bring  all  to  believe.  He  conducted 
himself  as  God's  Word  prescribed,  and  yet  some  of  his 
neighbors  continued  to  sin.  He  was  without  sin,  neverthe- 
less. His  ever-faithful  testimony  absolved  him  from  all 
responsibility  for  their  guilt.  We  are  disposed  to  conclude, 
then,  that  this  saying  of  Matthew  is  not  literally  true,  while, 
like  most  paradoxes,  it  is  suggestive  of  truth  and  most  pro- 
vocative of  thought. 

(3)  Later  tradition  affirms  that  Matthew  spent  some  fif- 
teen years  in  Judsea  after  the  crucifixion  and  then  was  sent 
to  Ethiopia  as  an  apostolic  evangelist.^^  Here  we  infer  that 
he  died  a  natural  death.  The  Gospels  tell  us  about 
Matthew's  call  and  his  farewell  feast,  and  nothing  more. 
Clement  of  Alexandria  tells  us  one  fact  concerning  him,  and 
one  of  his  sayings.  All  later  tradition  is  uncertain  and  pos- 
sibly unreliable. 

This  is  all,  therefore,  that  we  know  about  Matthew,  except 
(4)  that  all  early  church  tradition  unites  in  declaring  that 
he  was  responsible  for  the  compilation  or  the  composition 
of  our  first  Gospel.  That  alone  has  made  Matthew  im- 
mortal. As  Dean  Farrar  has  said :  "Out  of  this  life,  so  dis- 
credited in  its  youth,  so  unrecorded  in  its  manhood,  there 
flowed  a  most  memorable  service — the  first  Gospel  .  .  . 
It  is  not  the  only  instance  in  which  one  who  seems  to  have 
lived  much  alone  with  God  and  his  own  soul  has,  like  John 
Tauler  or  Thomas  a  Kempis,  embalmed  In  one  brief  book 

"  Socrates,  Hist.  Eccles.,  i,  19. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        35 

the  inmost  fragrance  of  a  blessed  spirit,  to  last  for  a  life 
beyond  life."  20 

Now,  upon  the  basis  of  the  facts  in  hand,  what  conclu- 
sions may  we  safely  draw  concerning  this  man  and  his  char- 
acter? 

5.  The  Man  and  His  Character,  (i)  He  was  a  Jew,  with 
the  training  of  a  Jew,  and  with  the  ineradicable  conscious- 
ness of  his  racial  prerogatives  and  relationships.  He  was 
as  well  acquainted  with  the  Old  Testament  as  the  average 
Jew,  and  as  conversant  with  all  the  Messianic  hopes  and 
promises. 

(2)  He  was  a  renegade  Jew,  having  broken  with  his  race 
in  becoming  a  publican.  There  must  have  been  something 
of  bitterness  in  his  spirit,  as  the  inevitable  result  of  such 
action.  He  must  have  soured  somewhat  in  his  disposition. 
It  is  not  in  human  nature  to  bear  the  scorn  of  a  community 
and  the  odium  of  continuous  contempt  and  the  burden  of 
social  ostracism  with  undisturbed  equanimity  of  temper. 
One  tends  to  react  into  bitterness  and  pessimism  and  gloom. 
We  would  expect  Matthew  to  show  an  element  of  sternness 
in  his  dealings  with  his  proud  and  haughty  persecutors 
among  the  Jews. 

(3)  On  the  other  hand,  Matthew  the  publican  might  be 
expected  to  be  more  friendly  with  the  other  publicans  and 
the  harlots  and  all  the  social  outcasts,  and  even  with  the  dogs 
of  Gentiles,  than  the  ordinary  Jew  ever  came  to  be.  He  was 
more  liberal  than  the  most  of  his  race.  He  was  a  man  of 
broad  sympathies,  who  realized  that  there  were  good  peo- 
ple outside  of  the  Jewish  blood,  and  that  every  human  heart 
had  unsuspected  resources  of  goodness  in  it  which  only 
needed  the  proper  treatment  to  bring  them  to  the  surface 
and  make  them  dominant  in  the  life.  Matthew  had  many 
friends  among  the  lower  classes,  and  he  beheved  that  they 
were  all  capable  of  salvation. 

(4)  He  must  have  been  a  man  of  strong  and  independent 
"Messages  of  the  Books,  p.  31. 


36       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

nature,  capable  of  standing  alone  if  need  be,  ready  to  brave 
the  worst  that  his  own  people  might  say  or  do  against  him 
when  he  had  determined  upon  a  course  of  action  which  he 
knew  they  would  disapprove,  a  strong  and  silent  man,  per- 
sistent in  the  face  of  all  remonstrance,  faithful  against  all 
odds,  firm  as  Gibraltar  in  all  storms  of  wind  or  sea. 

(5)  He  was  a  man  of  means.  He  may  have  chosen  to  be  a 
publican  because  that  office  was  more  remunerative  than 
any  other  in  that  city.  He  had  a  home  of  his  own ;  and  he 
was  able  to  entertain  a  large  number  of  people  in  his  fare- 
well feast.  His  house  must  have  been  large  and  his  hos- 
pitality must  have  been  famous,  to  gather  together  so  many 
publicans  and  sinners  on  short  notice  upon  that  occasion. 

(6)  Matthew  was  withal  a  modest  man.  This  is  apparent 
in  the  following  particulars,  o.  Luke  tells  us  that  Matthew 
"left  all,"  2^  when  he  followed  Jesus.  This  may  mean  that  he 
sacrificed  his  property  as  well  as  his  position  when  he  became 
a  disciple,  and  we  notice  that  Matthew  himself  in  the  account 
of  his  call  omits  all  mention  of  it.  His  modesty  forbade  his 
recording  it.    He  says  only,  "He  arose  and  followed  him."22 

b.  It  is  Luke  again  who  tells  us  that  the  feast  which  fol- 
lowed was  in  Matthew's  own  home.  Matthew  tells  us  what 
happened  there,  but  modestly  omits  all  mention  of  his  own 
generosity  and  hospitality  in  connection  with  it.  If  Paul 
Veronese  in  his  great  painting  of  "The  Banquet"  in  the 
Academy  at  Venice  is  at  all  justified  in  the  magnificence 
of  the  surroundings  and  the  munificence  of  the  repast 
which  he  has  pictured  there,  there  must  have  been  a  great 
sacrifice  of  material  comfort  and  wealth  when  Matthew  left 
all  to  follow  the  Lord.  He  possibly  sold  all  that  he  had  and 
gave  it  to  the  poor.  He  may  have  used  all  his  money  in 
hand  in  the  furnishing  of  this  farewell  feast.  He  did  leave 
all  his  prospects  of  any  advancement  in  his  chosen  field  of 
work.    Whatever  of  wealth  or  position  he  had,  he  left  it  all 

''  Luke  5-  28. 
"  Matt.  9-  9- 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        37 

to  follow  Jesus;  but  he  says  nothing  about  it.     The  other 
evangelists  give  us  these  facts. 

c.  In  the  list  of  the  apostles  Matthew  modestly  puts  the 
name  of  Thomas  before  his  own.^s  In  the  other  Synoptic 
lists  this  order  is  reversed  and  Matthew's  name  precedes 
that  of  Thomas.2* 

d.  He  is  the  only  one  to  write  himself  down  in  the  apostolic 
list  as  Matthew  the  publican.  It  was  not  a  title  of  which  to 
be  proud.  In  the  other  lists  of  the  apostles,  Matthew's 
name  is  given  and  the  disgraceful  profession  to  which  he 
had  once  belonged  is  not  mentioned.^^  Matthew  in  all  meek- 
ness and  honesty  affixes  that  opprobrious  title  to  his  name.^^ 
He  makes  no  apology  for  it.  He  has  no  desire  to  rescue  it 
from  the  odium  resting  upon  it. 

c.  He  does  not  record  the  parable  of  the  Pharisee  and  the 
publican,  in  which  the  Lord  seemed  to  suggest  that  a  repent- 
ant publican  was  to  be  justified  rather  than  his  self-right- 
eous critic  in  all  the  odor  of  ecclesiastical  sanctity.  It  is  just 
possible  that  this  parable  may  represent  a  personal  expe- 
rience in  the  life  of  Matthew.  That  suggestion  has  been 
made,  and  if  it  be  true  it  is  all  the  more  noteworthy  that 
Matthew  does  not  record  it,  while  Luke  does. 

/.  He  does  not  tell  the  story  of  Zacchseus  the  publican  with 
whom  the  Lord  preferred  to  lodge  rather  than  to  go  any- 
where else  in  Jericho.  We  might  have  expected  Matthew 
to  notice  those  incidents  in  the  Gospel  history  where  pub- 
licans were  singled  out  for  preference  or  special  favor.  His 
modesty  alone  would  prevent  him  from  recording  such 
things.  However,  his  modesty  would  not  prevent  him  from 
recording  the  Lord's  great  goodness  in  oflFering  his  compan- 
ionship and  his  salvation  to  such  as  he.  His  modesty  would 
not  preclude  his  testimony  to  the  great  grace  of  God  which 

'"Matt.  10.  3. 

"Mark  3.  18;  Luke  6.  15. 

•'Mark  3.  16-19;  Luke  6.  14-16,  and  Acts  i.  13. 

"Matt.  10.  3. 


38       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

had  reached  even  him  and  had  transformed  even  him  and 
had  made  of  him  a  miracle  of  mercy  and  a  guarantee  of 
God's  grace  offered  freely  to  all  of  his  class.  He  says,  "The 
Lord  made  me  an  apostle;  and  it  was  all  of  his  matchless 
grace,  for  I  was  a  publican !"  and  Matthew  alone  among  the 
evangelists  records  that  the  Lord  joined  the  publicans  and 
harlots  together  in  the  statement  that  they  believed  John 
the  Baptist  and  went  into  the  Kingdom  before  the  chief 
priests  and  the  elders  of  the  people.^''^ 

g.  Possibly  we  may  find  another  proof  of  Matthew's 
modesty  and  humility,  in  honor  preferring  another  to  him- 
self, in  the  fact  that  he  permitted  Judas  to  become  the  treas- 
urer of  the  apostolic  company  when  he  doubtless  was  much 
better  qualified  for  that  position  than  Judas  or  any  one  else. 

This,  then,  is  the  character  of  the  man  who  wrote  the 
first  Gospel.  He  was  a  renegade  Jew,  an  associate  with 
other  bad  characters,  publicans  and  harlots,  before  his  con- 
version, a  man  of  means  and  disposed  to  be  generous  with 
them,  a  strong  and  independent  nature,  stern  in  his  notions 
of  retribution  for  all  disobedience  to  law,  and  yet  a  lover 
of  his  fellow  men,  who  after  his  conversion  was  a  loyal 
Israelite  and  a  faithful  Christian,  a  modest,  silent  follower 
of  the  meek  and  lowly  One  whom  he  believed  to  be  the 
Messiah  of  the  Jews  and  the  Saviour  of  the  race.  If 
Matthew  ever  addressed  a  single  word  to  the  Master,  we 
have  no  record  of  it  in  our  Scriptures ;  but  Matthew  has 
recorded  more  of  the  words  of  Jesus  to  the  listening  multi- 
tudes of  Galilee  than  any  other  evangelist.  His  calling  and 
his  character  had  given  him  a  special  fitness  for  that  work. 
We  note  this  next. 

6.  His  Fitness  for  His  Work.  ( i )  As  a  publican  he  would 
be  used  to  writing  and  the  keeping  of  accounts. 

(2)  He  would  be  accustomed  to  the  orderly  arrangement 
of  his  thought  and  his  material. 

"  Matt.  21.  31,  32. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        39 

(3)  He  would  be  interested  in  numbers  and  careful  in 
the  details  of  his  work. 

(4)  He  was  acquainted  with  both  the  Greek  and  the 
Hebrew,  as  well  as  the  Aramaic. 

(5)  His  familiarity  with  pen  and  paper  would  enable  him 
to  take  down  the  longer  discourses  more  easily  than  others. 

(6)  He  knew  his  Old  Testament  better  than  any  other  of 
the  evangelists,  if  the  number  of  original  quotations  from 
it  is  any  criterion.  He  has  eleven ;  Mark,  two ;  Luke,  three, 
and  John,  nine. 

(7)  He  belonged  to  the  circle  of  the  intimate  friends  of 
Jesus,  and  may  have  been  a  relative. 

(8)  He  does  not  seem  to  have  been  prominently  engaged 
in  other  apostolic  work,  and  may  have  been  regarded  from 
the  very  beginning  as  the  fit  secretary  or  amanuensis  or 
record-keeper  of  the  twelve. 

What  sort  of  a  record  would  such  a  man  make?  What 
kind  of  a  Gospel  would  he  write?  If  we  have  read  the  man's 
character  correctly  we  ought  to  find  that  the  characteristics 
of  the  book  correspond  with  the  peculiar  training  and  char- 
acteristics of  the  man.  We  turn  from  our  study  of  the  man 
to  a  study  of  his  book  to  see  if  this  be  true. 

HI.  The  Book  and  Some  of  Its  Characteristics 

I.  This  is  The  Gospel  for  the  Jews. 

It  is  written  by  a  Jew  and  its  appeal  is  primarily  to  his  own 
countrymen.  This  appears  in  many  major  and  minor  pecu- 
liarities. 

( 1 )  This  Gospel  alone  begins  with  a  genealogy,  after  the 
fashion  of  Hebrew  histories.  Luke  has  a  genealogy,  intro- 
duced later  into  his  narrative.  Matthew  puts  "the  genera- 
tion of  Jesus  Christ"  first  of  all. 

(2)  In  this  genealogy  Jesus  is  declared  to  be  "the  son  of 
David,  the  son  of  Abraham,"  28  and  the  descent  of  Jesus 

"Matt.  I.  I. 


40       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

begins  with  Abraham,  the  father  of  the  Jewish  race.  That 
would  satisfy  the  Jews  for  whom  primarily  Matthew 
wrote.  Luke  in  his  genealogy,^^  carries  the  line  back  to 
Adam,  for  he  is  not  interested  so  much  in  emphasizing  the 
Jewish  descent  of  Jesus  as  his  brotherhood  with  the  entire 
race.  Matthew  gives  us  the  genealogy  of  the  Messiah  of  the 
Jewish  race;  Luke  gives  us  the  genealogy  of  the  Brother  of 
the  human  race. 

(3)  This  Gospel  gives  more  attention  to  the  prophecies  of 
the  Old  Testament  than  any  other,  and  especially  to  some  of 
the  prophecies  which  would  be  of  particular  interest  to  the 
Jews;  as,  for  example, 

"Out  of  thee  [Bethlehem]  shall  come  forth  a  governor, 
Who  shall  be  shepherd  of  my  people  Israel."  ^^ 

No  other  Gospel  has  these  words.  No  one  who  was  unac- 
quainted with  the  Hebrew  tongue  could  understand  such  a 
statement  as  that  found  in  Matthew:  He  "dwelt  in  a  city 
called  Nazareth ;  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken 
by  the  prophets,  that  he  should  be  called  a  Nazarene."  ^^ 
This  becomes  intelligible  only  in  the  light  of  the  Hebrew  of 
Isaiah  11.  i. 

(4)  This  Gospel  does  not  explain  Jewish  religious  and 
civil  customs  nor  give  geographical  and  topographical  de- 
tails, as  the  other  Gospels  do.  It  presupposes  that  its  readers 
are  resident  in  Palestine  and  will  know  all  of  these  things. 

(5)  In  no  other  Gospel  does  the  Lord  give  such  unquali- 
fied indorsement  to  the  Jewish  law.  Here  only  we  read  that 
he  said,  "Think  not  that  I  came  to  destroy  the  law  or  the 
prophets:  I  came  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfill."  ^^  Here 
only  we  hear  the  statement  and  the  command,  "The  scribes 
and  the  Pharisees  sit  on  Moses'  seat:  all  things  therefore 

"Luke  3.  38. 

'"Micah  5.  2,  quoted  in  Matt.  2.  6. 

"Matt.  2.  23. 

"'Matt.  5.  17. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        41 

whatsoever  they  bid  you,  these  do  and  observe."  ^^  In  this 
Gospel  alone  do  we  find  sin  called  dvonia,  lawlessness.^* 

At  the  same  time,  a  clear  line  of  distinction  is  drawn  be- 
tween the  divine  law  and  the  rabbinical  additions  and  cor- 
rupt traditions  of  the  scribes.  Nowhere  are  the  scribes  and 
Pharisees  so  bitterly  denounced  for  their  innate  disloyalty  to 
the  higher  law  and  their  insistence  upon  petty  ceremonial 
observances  as  in  the  twenty-third  chapter  of  this  Gospel. 
The  Gospel  according  to  Matthew  is  a  Gospel  for  the  Jews, 
but  it  is  a  Gospel  of  the  genuine  Judaism  as  opposed  to  the 
travesty  of  the  faith  and  the  degenerate  type  of  the  reli- 
gion represented  by  the  Pharisees  and  the  Sadducees  and 
the  scribes  and  the  priests  of  that  day.  They  thought  they 
were  fulfilling  the  law,  but  they  were  destroying  it  by  mak- 
ing it  an  unendurable  burden.  Jesus  came  to  fulfill  the  law 
by  filling  it  full  of  freedom  and  mercy  and  grace.  He  de- 
stroyed it  too,  by  replacing  it  with  something  higher  and 
better,  its  legitimate  consummation.  They  would  have  de- 
stroyed it  not  by  filling  it  full  but  by  draining  it  dry.  That 
was  the  difference  between  Jesus  and  the  Jewish  officials  of 
his  day.    Matthew  makes  this  difference  very  clear. 

(6)  Matthew  also  makes  it  perfectly  clear  that  the  mes- 
sage of  salvation  came  to  the  Jews  first ;  and  only  after  their 
rejection  was  it  preached  to  the  Samaritans  and  the  Gentiles. 
He  is  careful  to  safeguard  the  prerogatives  of  the  Jews  at 
this  point.  In  this  Gospel  only  do  we  find  Jesus  command- 
ing the  twelve  on  their  first  mission,  "Go  not  into  any  way 
of  the  Gentiles,  and  enter  not  into  any  city  of  the  Samaritans : 
but  go  rather  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel."  ^s 

In  this  Gospel  alone  do  we  read  that  Jesus  said  to  the 
Syrophoenician  woman  concerning  his  own  mission,  "I  was 
not  sent  but  unto  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel."  ^o 


"Matt.  23.  2,  3. 

»*Matt.  7.  23;  13.  41 ;  23.  28;  24.  12. 

"  Matt.  10.  5,  6. 

••  Matt.  15.  24. 


42       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

(7)  In  this  Gospel  alone  do  we  find  the  record  of  the 
quaking  earth  and  the  rending  rocks  and  the  opened  tombs 
and  the  resurrected  saints  seen  in  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of 
the  crucifixion.^"^  These  things  were  of  most  interest  and 
importance  to  the  Jews. 

(8)  In  this  Gospel  alone  do  we  find  that  peculiarly  Jewish 
promise  made  to  the  twelve,  "Verily  I  say  unto  you,  that  ye 
which  have  followed  me,  in  the  regeneration  when  the  Son 
of  man  shall  sit  on  the  throne  of  his  glory,  ye  also  shall  sit 
upon  twelve  thrones,  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel."  ^s 

(9)  This  is  the  Gospel  of  the  great  commission.  It  begins 
with  the  statement  that  Jesus  was  the  son  of  Abraham ;  and 
to  Abraham  God  had  promised  that  in  his  seed  all  the  nations 
of  the  earth  should  be  blessed.  The  Gospel  closes  with  the 
suggestion  that  the  time  has  come  for  the  fulfillment  of  that 
promise  through  Jesus  and  the  disciples  of  Jesus.  The  bless- 
ing has  been  won  for  the  race,  and  Jesus  says  to  the  eleven, 
"Go  ye  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of  all  the  nations."  ^^ 

(10)  In  this  Gospel  alone  is  Jerusalem  called  the  holy 
city,  and  the  city  of  the  great  King.**^ 

(11)  In  this  Gospel  alone  is  the  temple  declared  to  be  the 
dwelling  place  of  God,  and  the  holy  place,  and  the  temple  of 
God.  -n 

(12)  Delitzsch  traces  in  this  Gospel  written  for  the  Jews 
a  resemblance  to  the  Pentateuch.  Thus  he  arranges  it  in 
five  parts.  The  first  chapter  of  Matthew  is  "the  book  of 
the  generation  of  Jesus  Christ,"  and  corresponds  to  Genesis. 
The  second  chapter  begins  with  the  slaughter  of  infants  at 
Bethlehem,  and  the  escape  of  Jesus,  as  Exodus  began  with 
the  slaughter  of  infants  in  Egypt  and  the  escape  of  Moses. 
The  Sermon  on  the  Mount  in  Galilee  is,  of  course,  the 


"  Matt.  27.  51-53. 

"  Matt.  19.  28. 

■^  Matt.  28.  19. 

"  Matt.  4-  5 ;  5-  35. 

*'  Matt.  23.  21 ;  24.  15 ;  21.  12 ;  26.  61. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        43 

counterpart  to  the  law  given  from  Mount  Sinai.  The  eighth 
chapter  opens  with  the  cleansing  of  a  leper.  We  have  then 
reached  what  answers  to  the  book  of  Leviticus.  When  we 
come  to  the  tenth  chapter  we  read  of  the  organization  pro- 
vided for  the  church  under  the  twelve  apostles,  correspond- 
ing to  the  narrative  in  Numbers  of  the  ordering  of  the  twelve 
tribes  of  Israel  under  their  princes.  At  the  nineteenth 
chapter  of  the  Gospel,  where  the  ministry  in  Judaea  begins — 
a  ministry  of  reproof,  exhortation,  and  prophecy — we  enter 
on  the  parallel  to  the  book  of  Deuteronomy.  The  whole 
ends  with  the  death  and  implied  (not  affirmed)  ascension 
of  Jesus,  and  with  directions  for  the  future  guidance  of  the 
church,  just  as  the  Pentateuch  ends  with  the  death  and  im- 
plied ascension  of  Moses,  and  with  directions  for  the  future 
guidance  of  Israel.^^  j^  is  an  ingenious  parallel,  and, 
whatever  element  of  fancy  there  may  be  about  it,  it  yet 
remains  clear  that  no  such  parallel  could  be  made  with  the 
contents  of  any  other  of  our  Gospels. 

We  now  have  given  twelve  indications  of  the  fact  that 
the  first  Gospel  was  intended  primarily  for  the  Jews. 
Matthew  was  a  Jew,  and  he  had  the  cause  of  the  Jew  at 
heart,  and  he  wrote  a  Gospel  which  in  comparison  with,  and 
by  contrast  to,  the  others  deserves  to  be  called  a  Gospel  for 
the  Jews.  Now,  the  Jews  were  the  people  of  a  Book,  and 
their  sacred  Book  was  filled  with  prophecies  in  the  realization 
of  which  they  expected  to  enter  upon  their  Golden  Age.  All 
their  hopes  centered  in  the  Messiah.  His  coming  would 
bring  all  other  good  things  in  its  train.  Matthew  believed 
that  Jesus  was  the  expected  Messiah  and  in  writing  out  that 
good  news  for  the  Jews  he  must  show  them  that  in  Jesus  the 
Messianic  prophecies  were  fulfilled.  A  Gospel  for  the 
Jews  must  be  a  Gospel  of  Fulfillment  to  serve  its  end.  The 
first  Gospel  is  emphatically  worthy  of  that  name. 

2.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Fulfillment. 

It  is  as  Godet  has  said:  "The  formula,  'that  it  might  be 

"Fraser,  Synoptical  Lectures,  vol.  ii,  pp.  47,  48. 


44       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

fulfilled,'  is  like  a  refrain  repeated  in  every  page  of  the  book. 
In  the  two  first  chapters  we  find  five  detached  incidents  of 
the  childhood  of  Jesus,  connected  with  five  prophetic  say- 
ings. At  the  opening  of  the  ministry,  in  chapter  four,  is 
a  prophecy  of  Isaiah  which  forms  as  it  were  its  general  text 
or  motto,  and  announces  that  Galilee  is  to  be  the  theater  of 
the  Messianic  work.  In  chapter  eight,  as  the  central  point 
of  a  collection  of  miraculous  incidents,  we  have  a  saying  of 
the  same  prophet,  revealing  the  moral  significance  of  all 
these  wonders:  'Himself  took  our  infirmities  and  bare  our 
sicknesses.'  The  series  of  teachings  given  in  chapter  twelve 
is  also  connected  with  a  prophetic  saying:  'Behold  my  serv- 
ant whom  I  have  chosen  ...  he  shall  not  strive  nor  cry 
...  a  bruised  reed  shall  he  not  break.'  And  so  on,  up  to 
the  account  of  the  Passion,  of  which  every  feature  is  in  some 
way  designated  as  the  fulfillment  of  a  prophecy."  ^^ 

The  phrases,  Iva  (or  ottw^-)  ttAt/pw^^  to  prjdev,  and  tots 
enXi]pu)6r)  to  prjdev  and  others  concerning  the  fulfillment  of 
Scripture  occur  thirteen  times  in  the  Gospel  according 
to  Matthew.^^  They  never  are  found  in  the  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  Mark  or  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke.  They  oc- 
cur six  times  in  the  Gospel  according  to  John.  Judging 
by  the  evidence  of  these  phrases  alone,  we  could  conclude 
that  of  the  four  evangelists  the  two  who  were  apostles  were 
much  more  interested  in  the  fulfillment  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Messianic  prophecies  than  the  other  two,  and  that 
Matthew  laid  twice  as  much  stress  as  John  upon  this  ful- 
fillment. The  first  Gospel  is  almost  a  manual  of  Messianic 
prophecy.  Matthew  himself  evidently  is  thoroughly  familiar 
with  the  Old  Testament,  and  we  readily  can  believe  that  his 
own  faith  in  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus  was  greatly  strength- 
ened by  the  study  of  the  Jewish  Scriptures.  He  studied  the 
life  of  Jesus  and  he  studied  the  prophetic  books,  and  again 

"New  Testament  Studies,  p.  ii. 

"i.  22;  2.  IS,  17,  23;  4.  14;  8.  17;  12.  17;  13.  14;  13.  35;  21.  4; 
26.  54,  56;  27.  9. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        45 

and  again  he  was  struck  with  the  strange  correspondence 
between  these  two.  When  he  wrote  his  book  he  used  the 
prophecies  to  illustrate  and  illuminate  the  life. 

Professor  Bruce  has  pointed  out  the  contrast  between  the 
first  and  the  second  Gospels  at  this  point.  He  says :  "Mark's 
dry  statement,  'They  went  into  Capernaum,'  i.  21,  referring 
to  Jesus  and  his  followers  proceeding  northward  from  the 
scene  of  the  baptism,  in  Matthew's  hands  assumes  the  char- 
acter of  the  solemn  announcement  of  an  epoch-making  event, 
whereby  an  ancient  oracle  concerning  the  appearing  of  a 
great  light  in  Galilee  of  the  Gentiles  received  its  fulfillment, 
4.  12-17.  Again,  Mark's  matter-of-fact  report  of  the  ex- 
tensive healing  function  in  Capernaum  on  the  Sabbath  even- 
ing is  in  Matthew  adorned  with  a  beautiful  citation  from 
Isaiah's  famous  oracle  concerning  the  suffering  servant  of 
Jehovah,  8.  17.  Once  more,  to  Mark's  simple  statement  that 
Jesus  withdrew  himself  to  the  sea  after  the  collision  with 
the  Pharisees,  occasioned  by  the  healing  on  a  Sabbath  of 
the  man  with  a  withered  hand,  the  first  evangelist  attaches  a 
fine  prophetic  picture,  as  if  to  show  readers  the  true  Jesus 
as  opposed  to  the  Jesus  of  Pharisaic  imagination,  12.  15-21. 
From  these  instances  we  see  his  method.  He  is  not  inventing 
history,  but  enriching  history  with  prophetic  emblazon- 
ments for  apologetic  purposes,  or  for  increase  of  edifica- 
tion." « 

Matthew's  quotations  from  the  Old  Testament  are  not 
always  direct  Messianic  prophecies.  He  has  these,  as  in 
2.  6;  7.  17;  12.  17;  26.  24.  Sometimes,  however,  his  quo- 
tations are  merely  literary  appropriations  of  analogies  in  the 
Old  Testament  or  fulfillments  in  type,  as  in  2.  15;  2.  17;  4. 
14.  In  some  cases  the  statements  of  the  Old  Testament  are 
altered,  to  make  them  fit  into  the  situation  in  the  life  of 
Jesus,  as  in  3.  3,  where  Matthew  has,  "The  voice  of  one  cry- 
ing in  the  wilderness,"  instead  of  Isaiah's,  "The  voice  of  one 
that  crieth.  Prepare  ye  in  the  wilderness  the  way  of  the 

**  Expositor's  Greek  Testament,  vol.  i,  pp.  40,  41. 


46       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Lord,"  Isa.  40.  3 ;  and  as  in  27.  9,  where  we  have  a  very  far- 
fetched analogy  to  Zech.  11.  12,  13. 

Matthew  was  so  convinced  that  the  Old  Testament  was 
filled  with  foreshadowings  of  Jesus  that  he  appropriated 
without  hesitation  not  only  direct  references  to  the  coming 
Messiah  but  anything  and  everything  which  could  be  brought 
into  even  remote  connection  with  him.  Therefore,  not  all 
of  Matthew's  quotations  have  evidential  value.  Some  are 
merely  literary  embellishments,  analogies  of  type,  or  remote 
analogies  of  appropriate  and  appropriated  language ;  "but  all 
serve  to  show  that  to  Matthew's  mind  the  Old  Testament 
was  of  chief  interest  as  it  bore  witness  to  Jesus,  and  that 
it  was  clear  to  him  that  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  was  a  Gospel 
of  Fulfillment  throughout.  He  saw  fulfillment  of  historical 
and  ritual  and  legal  types  in  Jesus,  which  the  Jews  had  failed 
to  see.  This  book  was  written  partly  to  open  their  eyes  at 
this  point.  In  the  New  Testament  it  serves  the  same  pur- 
pose among  the  Gospels  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
serves  among  the  Epistles.  Both  endeavor  to  show  that  the 
Old  Testament  history  and  prophecy  and  legal  requirements 
and  ritual  observances  have  found  their  fulfillment  in  Jesus. 

It  is  but  natural,  therefore,  that  we  should  find  more  of 
the  Old  Testament  in  the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew  than 
in  any  of  the  others.  It  has  more  quotations  from  the  Old 
Testament  in  proportion  to  its  length  than  any  New  Testa- 
ment writing,  except  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  Nine  times 
we  find  direct  quotations  introduced  by  the  phrase,  "It  is 
written,"  and  six  times  the  introductory  -phrase  is  "It  has 
been  said  by  them  of  old  time."  ^®  Six  times  Jesus  challenges 
his  opponents  with  the  ironical  question,  "Have  you  never 
read"  this  or  that  passage  of  the  Old  Testament  which  bears 
upon  this  question  or  throws  its  light  upon  this  situation? 
In  this  way  he  refers  these  professed  masters  in  Bible  lore 
to  Genesis,  Exodus,  Numbers,  First  Samuel,  the  book  of 


'  2.  5 ;  4.  4,  6,  7,  10 ;  II.  10 ;  21.  13 ;  26.  24,  31 ;  5.  21,  27,  31,  33,  38,  43. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        47 

Psalms,  and  Isaiah.'*^  Besides  these  which  we  have  men- 
tioned there  are  six  other  direct  quotations  from  the  Old 
Testament  in  Matthew,  and  between  forty  and  fifty  allusions 
to  Old  Testament  phraseology.  Altogether  nineteen  Old 
Testament  books,  the  five  books  of  the  Law,  three  historical, 
two  poetical,  and  nine  prophetical  books  are  used  by 
Matthew  in  the  composition  of  his  Gospel.  Fifteen  Old 
Testament  characters  are  mentioned  by  name,  besides  those 
whose  names  occur  in  the  genealogy.  The  Gospel  according 
to  Matthew  is  a  New  Testament  book,  but  it  is  built  upon 
Old  Testament  foundations  throughout. 

When  John  the  Baptist  thought  that  Jesus  ought  not  to 
come  to  him  for  baptism,  Jesus  answered,  "Suflfer  it  now: 
for  thus  it  becometh  us  to  fulfill  all  righteousness."  *^  In 
the  life  of  Jesus  there  was  a  fulfillment  of  all  prophecy,  and 
in  the  life  of  Jesus  there  was  a  fulfillment  of  all  righteous- 
ness. The  Gospel  of  Fulfillment  is  the  Gospel  of  Right- 
eousness as  well. 

3.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Righteousness. 

The  words  dUaiog,  "righteous,"  and  ScKaioavvr],  "righteous- 
ness," are  not  absolutely  peculiar  to  Matthew's  use,  but  they 
occur  more  times  in  the  first  Gospel  than  in  the  other  three 
combined,  and  so  become  characteristic  of  it. 

( I )  In  Matthew  alone  we  are  told  that  Joseph  the  husband 
of  Mary  was  a  righteous  man.^^  (2)  In  Matthew  alone  we 
read,  "Blessed  are  they  that  hunger  and  thirst  after  right- 
eousness." ^^  In  Luke  we  read,  "Blessed  are  ye  that  hunger 
now:  for  ye  shall  be  filled."  ^^  (3)  In  Matthew  alone  we 
read,  "Blessed  are  they  that  have  been  persecuted  for  right- 
eousness' sake."  ^2    Luke  omits  this  characteristic  phrase  of 


"12.3,  5;  19.  4;  21.  16,42;  22.31. 

"  Matt.  3.  15. 

"Matt.  I.  19. 

"  Matt  5.  6. 

"  Luke  6.  21. 

"  Matt  5.  10. 


48       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Matthew  and  says  instead,  "Blessed  are  ye,  when  men  shall 
hate  you,  and  .  .  .  separate  you  .  .  .  ,  and  reproach 
you   .    .    .    for  the  Son  of  man's  sake."  ^3 

(4)  In  Matthew  alone  we  read,  "For  I  say  unto  you,  that 
except  your  righteousness  shall  exceed  the  righteousness  of 
the  scribes  and  Pharisees,  ye  shall  in  no  wise  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  heaven."  ^*  (5)  In  Matthew  alone  we  read, 
The  Father  "sendeth  rain  on  the  just  and  the  unjust  [right- 
eous and  the  unrighteous]."^^  (6)  In  Matthew  alone  we 
read,  "Take  heed  that  ye  do  not  your  righteousness  before 
men,  to  be  seen  of  them."  ^^ 

That  was  the  indictment  of  Jesus  against  the  Phari- 
sees, that  their  righteousness  was  external  and  superficial, 
consisting  too  largely  and  too  exclusively  of  external  acts, 
and  giving  too  little  attention  to  the  inner  motives  and  the 
purity  of  the  personal  life.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was  the 
indictment  of  the  Pharisees  against  Jesus  and  his  disciples 
that  they  neglected  to  purify  their  hands  before  meals,^' 
and  to  observe  the  regular  fasts,^^  and  they  deliberately 
broke  the  rules  for  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath,^^  and 
they  habitually  consorted  with  the  unsavory  and  the  un- 
devout  classes  of  society. ^"^  How  could  people  do  these 
things  and  still  be  righteous?  That  is  the  tragedy  of  this 
Gospel,  as  of  so  much  of  church  history.  It  is  the  righteous 
arrayed  against  the  righteous.  In  the  name  of  right- 
eousness the  shining  examples  of  righteousness  among  the 
people  hunt  the  Righteous  One  to  death. 

(7)  In  Matthew  alone  we  read,  "Seek  ye  first  his  kingdom, 
and  his  righteousness;  and  all  these  things  shall  be  added 
unto  you."  ®^  Luke  records  the  command,  but  omits 
Matthew's  characteristic  word,  "Seek  ye  his  kingdom,  and 

"'  Luke  6.  22.  »'  Matt.  9.  14. 

"  Matt.  5.  20.  "  Matt.  12.  2. 

°'Matt.  5.45.  -^Matt.  9.  11. 

"Matt.  6.  I.  ''Matt.  6.  33. 
"  Matt.  15.  2, 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        49 

these  things  shall  be  added  unto  you."  ^^  (8)  In  Matthew 
alone  we  read,  "He  that  receiveth  a  righteous  man  in  the 
name  of  a  righteous  man  shall  receive  a  righteous  man's  re- 
ward." ^^  (9)  In  Matthew  alone  we  read,  "Many  prophets 
and  righteous  men  desired  to  see  the  things  which  ye  see, 
and  saw  them  not."  ^* 

(10)  Matthew  alone  has  the  promise,  "Then  shall  the 
righteous  shine  forth  as  the  sun  in  the  kingdom  of  their 
Father."  ^^  (11)  Matthew  alone  has  the  Master's  statement, 
"The  angels  shall  come  forth,  and  sever  the  wicked  from 
among  the  righteous."  "^e  (12)  Matthew  alone  records  that 
saying  of  Jesus  to  the  chief  priests  and  elders,  "John  came 
unto  you  in  the  way  of  righteousness,  and  ye  believed  him 
not."  «^ 

(13)  Matthew  alone  has  that  scathing  rebuke  of  Jesus  to 
the  scribes  and  the  Pharisees,  and  he  rings  the  changes  on 
the  word  "righteous"  through  all  the  closing  sentences. 
"Ye  also  outwardly  appear  righteous  unto  men,"  ^®  "Ye 
.  .  .  garnish  the  tombs  of  the  righteous,"  ®^  "Upon  you 
may  come  all  the  righteous  blood  shed  on  the  earth,  from 
the  blood  of  Abel  the  righteous  unto  the  blood  of  Zacha- 
riah."  '^"  Luke  has  this  closing  statement  with  the  two  oc- 
currences of  the  word  "righteous"  left  out.'^^  (14)  In 
Matthew  alone  we  have  that  final  parable  of  judgment,  and 
in  it  we  read,  "Then  shall  the  righteous  answer  him,  saying. 
Lord,  when  saw  we  thee  an  hungred,  and  fed  thee  ?"  '^^  and 
then  at  last,  "The  righteous  [shall  go]  into  eternal  life,'"^^ 
(15)  In  Matthew  alone  we  read  that  Judas  said,  "I  have 
sinned  in  that  I  betrayed  innocent   [righteous]    blood."  "^^ 


"Luke  12.  31.  "Matt.  23.  29. 

"Matt.  10.  41.  '"Matt.  23.  35. 

"Matt.  13.  17.  "Luke  li.  51. 

"Matt.  13.  43.  "Matt.  25.  37. 

""Matt.  13.  49.  "Matt.  25.  46. 

"Matt.  21.  32.  '*Matt.  27.  4. 

"Matt.  23.  28. 


50       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

(i6)  Matthew  alone  records  that  Pilate's  wife  sent  word 
to  him,  "Have  thou  nothing  to  do  with  that  righteous 
man,"  "^^  and  that  Pilate  washed  his  hands  before  the  multi- 
tude, saying,  "I  am  innocent  of  the  blood  of  this  righteous 
man."  ^e 

From  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  this  Gospel  Jesus  is  the 
Righteous  One,  the  One  fulfilling  all  righteousness,  and  his 
disciples  are  called  unto  righteousness.  The  whole  book, 
therefore,  becomes  an  exposition  of  the  nature  and  claims  of 
righteousness,  as  set  forth  in  the  life  and  the  teaching  of 
Jesus  and  his  followers.  It  is  characteristic  of  Matthew's 
presentation  that  he  makes  the  gospel  of  Jesus  a  Gospel  of 
Righteousness  throughout.  Jesus  said,  "Seek  ye  first  his 
kingdom,  and  his  righteousness."  '^'^  The  righteousness  he 
demanded  was  the  righteousness  of  the  Kingdom.  The  Gos- 
pel of  Righteousness  was  the  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom  as  well. 

4.  This  Gospel  is  The  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom. 

Matthew  calls  it  "the  kingdom  of  the  heavens."  The 
other  evangelists  have  the  phrase,  "the  kingdom  of  God,"  "^^ 
but  "the  kingdom  of  the  heavens"  is  found  in  Matthew  alone. 
It  occurs  in  the  first  Gospel  thirty-three  times,  and  nowhere 
else  in  the  New  Testament.  Both  by  its  uniqueness  and  its 
frequency  of  use  it  becomes  characteristic  of  this  Gospel 
throughout.  The  plural,  ovpavoi,  heavens,  is  a  Hebraism: 
and  we  are  not  surprised  to  find  it  in  a  Gospel  written  by  a 
Hebrew  for  the  Hebrews.  John  never  has  this  plural.  Luke 
has  it  only  four  times,  and  never  combined  with  "the  king- 
dom." Matthew  has  it  even  when  speaking  of  the  dwelling 
place  of  God."^^ 

(i)  In  this  Gospel  alone  the  message  of  John  the  Baptist 
is  given,  "Repent  ye;   for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at 


''Matt.  27.  19. 

"  Matt.  27.  24. 

"  Matt.  6.  33. 

"Found  also  in  Matt.  12.  28;  19.  24;  21.  31,  43. 

"Matt  6.  1,9. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        51 

hand."  ^^  In  the  preaching  of  John  as  recorded  in  Mark 
and  Luke  there  is  nothing  about  a  kingdom.  They  say  that 
John  preached  "the  baptism  of  repentance  unto  remission  of 
sins."  " 

(2)  According  to  Matthew  the  text  of  the  first  sermons 
of  Jesus  was,  "Repent  ye;  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is 
at  hand,"  ^^  and  he  began  his  first  sermon  recorded  here, 
"Blessed  are  the  poor  in  spirit;  for  theirs  is  the  kingdom  of 
heaven."  ^3  (3)  The  further  record  is  that  he  went 
everywhere  preaching  "the  gospel  of  the  kingdom."  ^* 
Jesus  has  no  other  name  for  it.  Only  once  in  this  book  does 
he  speak  of  "the  gospel,"  without  calling  it  the  gospel  of 
the  kingdom.®'^  It  is  true,  therefore,  in  a  sense  that  Jesus 
did  not  preach  the  gospel  of  salvation ;  "He  came  that  there 
might  be  a  gospel  of  salvation  to  preach.  He  is  the  gospel 
of  salvation ;  he  preached  the  gospel  of  the  Kingdom,"  ^e 
In  this  Gospel  only  is  the  preaching  of  Jesus  called  "the 
word  of  the  kingdom,"  ^7  What  the  other  books  of  the  New 
Testament  repeatedly  call  "the  gospel,"  Matthew  with  but 
one  exception  calls  "the  gospel  of  the  kingdom."  ^s 

(4)  The  characteristic  difference  between  the  presentation 
of  this  gospel  in  Matthew  and  in  the  other  evangelists  can 
be  seen  in  a  comparison  of  Matt.  18.  1-4  with  Luke  9.  46-48. 
In  Matthew  we  read  that  the  disciples  asked,  "Who  then  is 
greatest  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven?"  Jesus  set  a  child  in 
the  midst  of  them  and  said,  "Except  ye  turn,  and  become 
as  little  children,  ye  shall  in  no  wise  enter  into  the  king- 

"Matt  3.  2. 
"  Mark  i.  4.    Luke  3.  3. 
"  Matt  4.  17. 
"  Matt  5.  3. 

•*  Matt  4.  23 ;  5.  3,  10,  19,  20. 
"  Matt  26.  13. 

"  The  Teachings  of  the  Books,  p.  29. 
"Matt  13.  19. 

"•  Matt.  9.  35 ;  24.  14.  The  exception,  already  noted,  is  in 
Matt.  36.  13. 


52       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

dom  of  heaven.  Whosoever  therefore  shall  humble  himself 
as  this  little  child,  the  same  is  the  greatest  in  the  kingdom  of 
heaven."  Three  times  in  the  four  verses  the  phrase,  "the 
kingdom  of  heaven"  appears.  When  we  turn  to  Luke  we 
find  the  same  story  with  Matthew's  thrice  repeated  phrase 
omitted. 

(5)  What  is  true  of  all  of  the  preaching  of  Jesus  as  pre- 
sented in  Matthew  is  particularly  true  of  his  parables.  The 
first  Gospel  has  fifteen  of  our  Lord's  parables,  and  twelve 
of  them  begin  with  the  words,  "The  kingdom  of  heaven 
is  Uke  unto — ."  See  how  the  phrase  recurs  in  the  parable 
chapter,  the  thirteenth.  "Unto  you  it  is  given  to  know  the 
mysteries  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  "The  kingdom  of 
heaven  is  likened  unto  a  man  that  sowed  good  seed  in  his 
field."  "The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  Hke  unto  a  grain  of  mus- 
tard seed."  "The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  Hke  unto  leaven." 
"The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  hke  unto  a  treasure  hidden  in 
the  field."  "The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like  unto  a  man  that 
is  a  merchant  seeking  goodly  pearls."  "The  kingdom  of 
heaven  is  like  unto  a  net,  that  was  cast  into  the  sea,  and 
gathered  of  every  kind."  "Every  scribe  who  hath  been 
made  a  disciple  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like  unto  a  man 
that  is  a  householder."  Eight  times  in  the  single  chapter 
the  changes  are  rung  on  this  phrase,  "the  kingdom  of 
heaven,"  ^^  and  in  the  parallels  in  the  other  Gospels  the 
phrase  is  not  found. 

Again  we  read,  "The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  likened  unto 
a  certain  king,  who  made  a  marriage  feast  for  his  son."  ^^ 
In  Luke  we  find  the  same  parable,  but  nothing  is  said  about 
a  kingdom  or  a  king.  Luke  has  it,  "A  certain  man  made  a 
great  supper."  Luke  always  is  emphasizing  the  real  hu- 
manity of  Jesus  and  the  broad,  human  aspects  of  his  gospel. 
In  accordance  with  this  point  of  view,  it  is  "a  man"  rather 
than  "a  king"  who  figures  in  his  parables;  "a  certain  man 

'"Matt.  13.  11,. 24,  31,  33,  44,  45,  47,  52. 
•"Matt.  22.  2. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        53 

made  a  great  supper,"  "a  certain  man  was  going  down 
from  Jerusalem  to  Jericho,"  "a  certain  man  had  two  sons."  ^^ 
In  Matthew,  on  the  contrary,  we  have  the  kingdom  and  the 
king.  "Then  shall  the  kingdom  of  heaven  be  likened  unto  ten 
virgins."  "Then  shall  the  King  say  unto  them  on  his  right 
hand.  Come  ,  .  .  ,  and  to  those  on  the  left  hand.  De- 
part." ^2  This  is  the  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom  because  it  is  the 
Gospel  of  the  King. 

5.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Jesus  the  King. 

Matthew  had  been  an  official.  He  had  due  respect  for  the 
authority  of  the  sovereign.  He  writes  of  Jesus  as  the  great 
King. 

(i)  The  genealogy  with  which  he  begins  is  that  of  the 
royal  line,  of  the  kings  and  the  heirs  of  kings.  Jesus  is 
shown  to  be  the  son  of  David,  the  legitimate  heir  of  the 
kingdom.  The  first  division  of  that  genealogy  shows  that 
David  was  the  heir  to  the  promises  made  to  Abraham. 
The  second  division  gives  the  fine  of  the  actual  kings  from 
David  to  the  exile  into  Babylon,  The  third  division  shows 
that  Jesus  was  in  the  line  of  the  lawful  heirs  to  the  throne  if 
the  kingdom  had  survived  and  the  rights  of  the  royal  family 
had  been  observed.  Jesus  was  born  in  the  royal  succession. 
He  had  the  blood  of  kings  in  his  veins.  Noblesse  oblige.  The 
obligation  was  upon  him  to  bear  himself  kinglike  from  the 
beginning  to  the  end. 

(2)  The  first  title  given  to  Jesus  by  man  in  this  Gospel  is 
found  in  the  question  of  the  Wise  Men,  "Where  is  he  that 
is  born  King  of  the  Jews?"  ^^  These  Wise  Men  had  come 
from  far  to  find  a  King.  When  they  found  the  babe  they 
fell  down  before  him  and  acknowledged  his  kingship  with 
royal  gifts  of  gold  and  frankincense  and  myrrh.  This  story 
is  found  in  this  Gospel  alone. 

(3)  It  is  in  this  Gospel  alone  that  we  read  of  Herod's 

"Luke  14.  16;  10.  25;  15.  II. 
"Matt.  25.  I,  34,  41. 
"  Matt.  2.  2. 


54       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

great  alarm  over  the  news  of  the  birth  of  a  rival  king,  for 
the  scribes  and  the  elders  read  him  the  prophecy  that  out 
of  Bethlehem  there  should  come  a  Governor  who  should  rule 
over  the  people  Israel.  Herod  himself  was  king.  He  would 
brook  no  rival.  He  slaughtered  all  the  Bethlehem  babes 
rather  than  run  any  risk  in  that  matter.  Matthew  alone  has 
told  us  how  uneasy  lay  the  head  that  wore  the  crown  when 
this  real  Head  of  God's  Israel  was  born. 

(4)  When  we  think  of  Mary  and  Jesus  we  speak  of  the 
Mother  and  Child.  Matthew  never  does.  It  is  always  "the 
child  and  his  mother"  with  him.^*  The  prince  takes  first 
rank  in  the  family  from  the  moment  of  his  birth,  in 
Matthew's  narrative. 

(5)  In  Matthew  when  Jesus  is  accused  of  sabbath-break- 
ing he  defends  himself  by  an  appeal  to  the  experience  and 
the  example  of  David,  the  king.^^  The  inference  is  plain. 
"David  did  this ;  why  should  not  I  ?  I  am  the  son  of  David, 
the  king."  In  John  we  find  the  same  charge  brought  against 
Jesus,  but  here  he  answers  not  as  the  son  of  David  by  an 
appeal  to  the  example  of  David,  but  as  the  Son  of  God  by  an 
appeal  to  the  example  of  the  Father. ^^ 

(6)  In  Matthew  we  read  that  Jesus  cured  a  blind  and 
dumb  man,  and  the  multitudes  were  amazed  and  said,  "Can 
this  be  the  son  of  David  ?"  ^'^  In  Luke  we  read  a  parallel 
account,  and  Luke  tells  us  that  the  multitudes  marveled,  but 
he  omits  their  question,  "Is  not  this  the  son  of  David?", 
which  Matthew  is  careful  to  put  into  his  record.^^  Eight 
times  in  this  Gospel  Jesus  is  called  the  son  of  David.^® 

(7)  In  Matthew  Jesus  conducts  himself  kingHke  from  the 
beginning  to  the  end  of  his  ministry,  with  a  royalty  all  his 


"Matt  2.  II,  13,  14,  20,  21. 

•"Matt.  12.  3. 

••John  5.  17. 

•^Matt.  12,  23. 

••Luke  II :  14. 

••  Matt.  I.  I ;  9.  27 ;  12.  23 ;  15.  22 ;  20.  30 ;  20.  31 ;  21.  9 ;  21.  15. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        55 

own.  Son  of  David,  the  King,  he  was  himself  every  inch  a 
king — King  over  the  angry  sea,^^'^  King  over  the  demoniac 
host,^*^^  King  in  the  midst  of  mobs.^^^  King  in  the  judgment 
hall/'^^  King  on  the  cross,  "This  is  Jesus  the  King  of 
THE  Jews."  ^^^  Pilate  asked  the  mocking  question,  "Art 
thou  the  King  of  the  Jews?",^*'^  and  the  echo  of  that  ques- 
tion voiced  the  truth.  The  soldiers'  banter  of  royal  robe  and 
reed  and  crown,  all  unwittingly  set  forth  the  fact.^"^  The 
chief  priests  and  scribes  and  elders  quoted  with  exquisite 
sarcasm,  "He  is  the  King  of  Israel,"  i^'^  and  were  wholly 
unconscious  that  all  they,  his  enemies,  were  thus  made  to 
confess  the  kingship  before  which  every  knee  should  bow. 
Jesus  was  a  king :  and  Matthew  shows  him  kingly  through- 
out. 

(8)  Three  times  Matthew  records  a  formal  presenta- 
tion of  Jesus  as  king  to  the  people :  at  his  birth,  when  the 
Wise  Men  roused  the  capital  city  with  their  inquiry,"  Where 
is  this  first-born  King  of  the  Jews?" ;  at  the  beginning  of  his 
active  ministry,  when  John  the  Baptist,  as  forerunner,  her- 
alded the  advent  of  a  kingdom  and  a  King;  and  at  the  close 
of  that  ministry,  when  Jesus  rode  into  the  royal  city  with 
something  of  the  assumption  of  royal  state,  and  the  people 
cried,  "Hosanna  to  the  Son  of  David,"  and  that  word  of 
prophecy  was  fulfilled  which  said, 

"Tell  ye  the  daughter  of  Zion, 
Behold,  thy  King  cometh  unto  thee."  ^^^ 

(9)  Matthew  alone  says  that  Jesus  spoke  with  author- 


""  Matt  8.  27. 

'"  Matt.  8.  29. 

""Matt.  21.  12,  13;  26.  52-55. 

'"•  Matt.  26.  64. 

'**  Matt.  27.  37. 

'"Matt.  27.  II. 

•"■  Matt.  27.  28,  29. 

'"  Matt.  27.  42. 

"*Matt.  2.  2;  3.  2;  21.  5,  9. 


56       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

ity,  and  this  statement  is  made  at  the  dose  of  the  discourse 
in  which  he  had  laid  down  "the  manifesto  of  a  King,"  what 
Tholuck  has  called  "the  Magna  Charta  of  the  new  king- 
dom." 109 

The  tone  of  authority  had  been  ringing  all  through 
that  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  Jesus  had  presumed  to  set 
aside  the  law  of  Moses  more  than  once.  "Ye  have  heard 
that  it  was  said  to  them  of  old  time: — ^but  I  say  unto 
you"  something  else,  something  better,  something  of  higher 
authority  than  that  of  the  old  law  thus  set  aside.  It  was 
the  habit  of  the  rabbis  and  theological  professors  then  as 
now  seldom  or  never  to  present  any  dictum  or  lay  down  any 
law  without  backing  it  up  with  a  respectable  list  of  author- 
ities, great  names  which  could  be  quoted  in  its  behalf.  Jesus 
never  quoted  authorities  among  the  rabbis  or  the  great 
masters  of  Israel.  He  spoke  with  the  authority  of  the  truth 
which  needed  no  recommendation  by  men.  He  spake  as 
never  man  spake  before  him.  He  spake  with  authority, 
and  not  as  the  scribes.  Fifty- four  times  in  this  Gospel  that 
"I  say  unto  you"  of  Jesus  occurs. 

In  this  Gospel  only  does  Jesus  claim  authority  to  purify 
his  kingdom,ii<^  and  it  is  in  the  twenty-third  chapter  of  this 
Gospel  that  we  find  the  fullest  presentation  of  the  exercise 
of  that  authority  by  Jesus,  that  chapter  in  which  he  pro- 
nounces the  woes  upon  the  hypocrisy  and  the  sin  of  the 
recognized  religious  authorities  among  the  people.  In  this 
Gospel  only  do  we  find  that  closing  statement  made  by 
Jesus,  "All  authority  hath  been  given  unto  me  in  heaven 
and  on  earth."  m  In  Matthew  alone  does  Jesus  give  to 
Peter  the  keys  of  the  kingdom.^^^  j^  Matthew  alone,  but  in 
this  Gospel  twice,  Jesus  speaks  of  sitting  on  the  throne  of 
his  glory.    "In  the  regeneration  when  the  Son  of  man  shall 


"» Matt.  7.  29. 
"» Matt.  13.  41. 
^"  Matt.  28.  18. 
""Matt  i6.  19. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        57 

sit  on  the  throne  of  his  glory,  ye  also  shall  sit  upon  twelve 
thrones,"  ^^^  and  "When  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his 
glory,  and  all  the  angels  with  him,  then  shall  he  sit  upon 
the  throne  of  his  glory :  and  before  him  shall  be  gathered  all 
the  nations.  .  .  .  Then  shall  the  King  say  unto  them  on 
his  right  hand,  Come,  ye  blessed  of  my  Father,  inherit  the 
kingdom  prepared  for  you  from  the  foundation  of  the 
world."  ^^^  In  Matthew  alone  Jesus  states  that  twelve 
legions  of  angels  were  at  his  command.^^^ 

(10)  In  the  account  of  the  crucifixion  Matthew  alone  tells 
us  of  the  darkness,  of  the  rent  rocks,  and  the  opened  graves; 
showing  how  heaven  and  earth  and  hades  acknowledged 
their  King.ns 

(11)  Matthew  describes  the  death  of  Jesus  by  a  peculiar 
expression,  "d(p7]Kev  to  nvevfia,"  "He  dismissed  his  spirit."  ^^"^ 
There  is  something  regal,  imperial,  about  the  very  phrase. 
According  to  Matthew,  the  last  act  of  his  life  was  a  kingly 
act.  Mark  and  Luke  use  the  same  word,  "e^envevoev,"  "He 
breathed  out  his  life,  he  expired."  ^^^  John  says,  "He  de- 
Uvered  up  his  spirit,"  "7rapedw«ev  to  rrvev/za."  ii9  Matthew 
alone  makes  even  the  death  of  Jesus  the  act  of  a  sovereign, 
the  deed  of  a  king. 

A  King  who  showed  himself  to  be  a  worthy  King  in 
word  and  deed,  and  yet  a  King  rejected  by  the  very  people 
over  whom  he  had  come*  to  rule ;  that  is  the  picture  of  the 
life  of  Jesus  presented  in  the  first  Gospel.  All  the  Gospel 
histories  are  tragic  enough,  but  the  Gospel  according  to 
Matthew  is  darkened  with  tragedy  throughout.  The  Gospel 
of  the  Rejected  King  becomes  a  Gospel  of  Gloom. 


"•  Matt.  19.  28. 

"*  Matt.  25.  31,  34. 

•"'  Matt.  26.  53. 

"•  Matt.  27.  45,  51-53. 

•"  Matt.  27.  50. 

"'Mark  15.  37;  Luke  23.  46. 

""John  19.  30. 


58       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

6.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Gloom. 

(i)  Luke's  narrative  begins  with  songs;  Matthew's  nar- 
rative begins  with  sobs.  Mary  weeps,  for  her  husband  is 
about  to  put  her  away.  Jerusalem  is  troubled.  Herod  is  in  a 
rage.  The  mothers  of  Bethlehem,  like  Rachel,  are  not  to  be 
comforted.  The  voice  of  their  mourning  was  heard  through 
the  land.  In  Luke  the  boy  is  welcomed  by  the  angels  and 
the  shepherds,  by  Simeon  and  Anna ;  and  Mary  and  Elisa- 
beth sing  for  joy.  The  second  chapter  of  Luke  closes, 
"Jesus  advanced  in  wisdom  and  in  stature,  and  in  favor 
with  God  and  men,"  The  second  chapter  of  Matthew  closes 
with  "He  should  be  called  a  Nazarene,"  and  all  through  this 
Gospel  Jesus  is  despised  and  rejected  of  men. 

(2)  In  this  Gospel  Jesus  continually  is  fleeing  from 
his  enemies,  "withdrawing"  into  some  safer  place.  That 
word  "withdraw,"  ava;t;wp£w,  becomes  characteristic  of 
Matthew's  use.  Mark  has  the  word  once,^2o  and  John 
once,^2i  and  Luke  not  at  all;  but  in  Matthew  we  find  it  ten 
times.^22 

(3)  There  is  no  word  of  human  sympathy  for  the  Cruci- 
fied One  recorded  in  this  Gospel,  no  penitent  thief  with  faith 
triumphing  in  death,  no  company  of  women  loudly  waiHng 
their  grief.  These  things  are  found  in  Luke;  but  there  is 
nothing  of  the  sort  in  Matthew.  In  this  narrative  all  who 
pass  by  revile  the  Crucified  One.^^s 

(4)  The  gloom  deepens  toward  the  close  of  the  narrative. 
There  is  only  one  cry  upon  the  cross  in  this  Gospel,  that 
awful  cry,  "Eli,  Eli,  lama  sabachthani,  .  .  .  My  God,  my 
God,  why  hast  thou  forsaken  me?"^24  There  are  seven 
words  on  the  cross  recorded  in  the  various  Gospels.  Is  it 
not  a  remarkable  fact  that  of  the  seven  only  one  is  recorded 


"» Mark  3.  7- 

"^John  6.  15. 

^Matt.  2.  12,  13,  14,  22;  4.  12;  9.  24;  12.  is;  14.  ij;  15.  21;  27.  5. 

*=*  Matt.  27.  39. 

"*  Matt.  27.  46. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        59 

in  the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew  and  the  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  Mark,  and  that  that  one  should  be  this  cry  of  agony 
and  despair?  Matthew  has  been  writing  the  life  history  of 
the  Messias  of  Israel,  and  the  last  words  he  records  as 
spoken  by  this  Messias  are  these  words  of  disappointment, 
this  confession  of  the  consciousness  that  he  was  forsaken 
of  God !  A  Messias  forsaken  of  God !  It  is  not  his  enemies 
who  say  it  of  him.  He  confesses  it  of  himself.  "My  God, 
my  God,  why  hast  thou  forsaken  me  ?"  and  then  his  lips  are 
closed  until  the  curtain  falls  upon  the  Crucified  One.  Could 
anything  be  gloomier  than  that?  If  we  had  had  no  other 
Gospel  than  this  first  Gospel,  we  might  have  believed  through 
all  the  centuries  that  our  Christ  died  with  this  one  cry  of 
inexplicable  perplexity  upon  his  lips,  with  this  sense  of  utter 
desolation  upon  his  soul,  with  his  spirit  overwhelmed  in 
the  depths  of  nethermost  darkness,  with  this  feeling  of 
absolute  depression  and  disappointment  and  despair.  If  we 
had  had  no  other  Gospel  than  this  Gospel  of  Gloom,  we 
might  have  supposed  forever  that  the  last  uttered  words  of 
our  Lord  were  this  cry  from  the  utter  midnight  of  the  soul. 

(5)  Matthew  is  a  pessimist  at  times.  He  alone  records 
the  statement  that  there  are  few  who  find  the  narrow  gate 
and  straitened  way  which  lead  into  life.^25  pjg  alone  pre- 
serves the  Lord's  saying  which  summarizes  the  truth  of 
the  marriage  feast  parable,  "Many  are  called,  but  few 
chosen,"  ^^e  and  he  alone  has  those  parables  of  judgment, 
the  tares,  the  dragnet,  the  ten  virgins,  and  the  sheep  and 
goats.  He  alone  preserves  the  prophecy  that  at  the  end  of 
the  age  the  love  of  the  majority  shall  wax  cold.^^r  Hq 
alone  emphasizes  the  outer  darkness  into  which  the  out- 
casts from  the  Kingdom  fall.^^s 

It  is  a  great  tragedy  which  Matthew  records,  and  the 

"•Matt  7.  14. 
"•Matt  22.  14. 
•"Matt  24.  12. 
'"Matt  20.  12,  13. 


6p       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

tragic  tone  pervades  his  narrative.     Again  and  again  we 
come  upon  words  which  make  the  blood  run  cold. 

(6)  That  fearful  twenty-third  chapter  is  peculiar  to  this 
Gospel.  Here  only  do  we  read  that  Jesus  called  the  religious 
authorities  "serpents  and  offspring  of  vipers."  ^^9  The 
chapter  climaxes  with*  the  statement,  "Behold,  your  house 
is  left  unto  you  desolate,"  ^^^  and  that  statement  is  followed 
by  the  other  statement  of  the  fact  which  fulfilled  it,  "Jesus 
went  out  from  the  temple,  and  was  going  on  his  way,"  ^^^ 
never  to  return  to  the  temple  precincts  again  during  the  in- 
carnation. That  first  statement  of  the  twenty-fourth 
chapter  never  should  have  been  separated  from  the  clos- 
ing statement  of  the  twenty-third  chapter.  The  recorded 
action  is  the  fulfillment  of  the  recorded  prophecy. 

(7)  Before  that  storm  had  burst,  there  had  been  mutter- 
ings  of  thunder  and  lightning  flashes  of  wrath  which 
Matthew  alone  records.  Here  only  we  find  that  the  man 
delivered  from  the  unclean  spirit  for  a  time  but  repossessed 
by  the  same  spirit  and  seven  others  more  evil  than  himself, 
the  last  state  of  whom  was  far  worse  than  the  first,  is  a  fit 
symbol  of  the  fate  of  that  evil  generation  to  which  Jesus 
spake.^^2  Here  only  we  read  that  Jesus  said  that  the  teach- 
ings of  the  Pharisees  were  many  of  them  ungodly  and  should 
be  as  plants  rooted  up.^^^  Here  only  Jesus  tells  the  rulers 
of  the  Jews,  "The  kingdom  of  God  shall  be  taken  away  from 
you,  and  shall  be  given  to  a  nation  bringing  forth  the  fruits 
thereof."  1^4 

(8)  The  final  miracle  of  Matthew's  account,  the  blasting  of 
the  fig  tree,i35  was  only  the  concrete  representation  of  the 


"•  Matt.  23.  33. 
""  Matt.  23.  38. 
"'  Matt.  24.  I. 
•"  Matt.  12.  43-45. 
"'Matt.  15.  13- 
"*  Matt.  21.  43. 
'*°Matt.  21.  19. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        6i 

blasting  ■'given  and  promised  to  the  faithless  and  fruitless 
people. 

(9)  Matthew  alone  records  that  Jesus  quoted  the  words 
of  Isaiah's  prophecy  and  applied  them  to  his  hearers,  saying, 

"This  people's  heart  is  waxed  gross, 
And  their  ears  are  dull  of  hearing. 
And  their  eyes  they  have  closed ; 
Lest  haply  they  should  perceive  with  their  eyes, 
And  hear  with  their  ears, 
And  understand  with  their  heart. 
And  should  turn  again. 
And  I  should  heal  them."  ^^e 

(10)  In  Matthew  alone  do  we  find  tht  climax  of  the 
gloomy  picture  of  the  national  rejection  of  the  King  in  their 
voluntary  assumption  of  the  consequences  of  their  deed, 
"And  all  the  people  answered  and  said,  His  blood  be  on  us, 
and  on  our  children."  ^^'^  Guilty  men  never  uttered  more 
terrible  words  than  those. 

The  reason  for  this  prevailing  gloom  in  the  first  Gospel 
is  that  it  is  the  Gospel  of  the  Messias,  who  was  the  Messias 
of  the  nation,  and  who  was  rejected  by  the  nation.  This 
rejection  was  the  greatest  possible  national  calamity.  The 
record  of  it  could  be  only  a  record  of  gloom.  There  may 
have  been  individuals  who  welcomed  the  truth,  but  Matthew 
is  not  interested  so  much  in  them.  He  had  been  an  official 
in  the  Roman  empire.  He  had  kept  official  records  in  his 
publican's  booth.  He  makes  of  this  Gospel  an  official  record 
of  the  relations  existing  between  the  nation's  Messias  and 
the  nation  itself.  The  record  becomes  a  gloomy  record 
because  it  is  devoted  to  this  official  aspect  of  the  Messianic 
career. 

7.  This  is  The  Oificial  Gospel. 

(i)  The  other  Gospels  are  full  of  the  accounts  of  per- 

'"Matt.  13.  15. 
'"  Matt.  27.  25. 


62       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

sonal  friendships  and  record  many  intimate  personal  and 
private  relations.  They  tell  us  of  that  disciple  whom  Jesus 
loved,  of  the  family  at  Bethany  and  their  hospitable  home 
and  their  devoted  hearts,  of  the  company  of  women  who 
journeyed  with  Jesus  and  ministered  to  him  and  his  dis- 
ciples, and  of  many  private  conversations  with  close  friends 
and  sympathetic  souls.    Matthew  omits  all  of  these  things. 

(2)  On  the  other  hand,  the  official  relation  of  John  the 
Baptist  to  the  Messianic  movement  is  emphasized  at  every 
turn  in  the  ministry  of  Jesus.^^^ 

(3)  The  denunciations  of  this  Gospel  are  the  denuncia- 
tions of  officials,  the  religious  authorities,  the  false  prophets, 
the  blind  guides,  the  men  who  deceive  and  mislead  the 
people ;  and  Jesus  calls  them  dogs-in-the-manger  and  raven- 
ing wolves.^3* 

(4)  The  parables  of  this  Gospel  picture  the  official  rela- 
tions of  the  kingdom  and  the  King.  (5)  The  precepts  of 
this  Gospel  have  to  do  with  the  official  relations  of  Messianic 
subjects  to  the  Messianic  Sovereign. 

(6)  The  final  discourse  of  Jesus  climaxes  in  the  Judg- 
ment scene,  in  which  all  nations  are  gathered  before  the 
King,  and  he  separates  them  one  from  another  by  official 
decree.i^**  (7)  The  Gospel  closes  with  the  official  commis- 
sion, "Go  ye  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of  all  the  na- 
tions." 141 

The  Jewish  nation  had  rejected  Jesus.  Other  nations 
would  receive  him.  All  nations  at  last  are  to  be  his  disciples. 
The  Gospel  of  Gloom  as  far  as  it  records  the  rejection  of 
the  Jews  becomes  a  Gospel  of  Hope  as  far  as  the  Gentiles 
are  concerned. 

8.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Hope  for  the  Gentiles. 

(i)  The  genealogy  in  the  first  chapter  suggests  it.    Four 


'"Matt.  4.  14;  II.  2;  14.  12;  17.  11-13. 
'"Matt.  7.  15;  23.  13-36;  24.  II. 
'"^  Matt.  25.  32-46. 
*'  Matt.  28.  19. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        63 

women  are  mentioned  in  that  genealogical  list,  namely, 
Tamar,  Ruth,  Rahab,  and  Bathsheba.  It  was  not  customary 
to  introduce  the  names  of  any  women  into  such  a  list.  We 
wonder  why  Matthew  does  it,  and  we  wonder  the  more 
when  we  see  that  these  four  names  are  the  names  of  a  pros- 
titute, a  harlot,  a  woman  of  an  alien  and  reprobate  race,  and 
an  adulteress.  Why  does  Matthew  put  any  women  into  his 
genealogy?  Why  does  he  put  these  women  in?  He  might 
have  found  the  names  of  good  and  noble  women,  like  Sarah 
and  Rachel  and  Rebecca  in  the  Jewish  history.  Why  does  he 
choose  these  four  for  mention  out  of  the  whole  possible  list  ? 

It  has  been  suggested  in  answer  to  these  questions  that  the 
Jews  had  been  whispering  slanders  against  the  Virgin  Mary, 
and  that  Matthew  in  militant  mood  reminds  them  by  the  in- 
troduction of  these  names  into  his  genealogy  that  people  in 
glass  houses  should  not  throw  stones.  Their  own  Royal 
House  had  several  blots  upon  its  'scutcheon,  and  such 
charges  as  they  had  been  making  came  with  very  poor  grace 
from  them.  The  first  heir  to  David's  throne  was  the  off- 
spring of  an  unlawful  marriage.  Matthew  does  not  name 
Solomon's  mother,  Bathsheba:  but  calls  her  "the  wife  of 
Uriah." 

This  may  be  true ;  but  we  prefer  to  believe  that  Matthew 
puts  these  women  into  the  list  because  each  of  them,  like 
Matthew  himself,  was  an  outcast,  either  with  a  clouded 
reputation  or  under  the  social  ban,  and  yet  each  of  them 
had  been  admitted  to  superlative  privilege  in  the  King- 
dom. If  these  were  acknowledged  members  of  the  Mes- 
sianic family,  there  surely  would  be  hope  for  any  one  to 
gain  admission  there.  At  any  rate,  two  of  these  women 
were  Gentiles,  foreigners  from  hated  and  hostile  tribes ;  and 
if  two  Gentiles  had  been  among  the  ancestresses  of  the  Lord, 
all  Gentiles  might  feel  that  they  had  a  share  in  the  redemp- 
tion he  brought. 

Rahab  was  a  Gentile,  and  worse.  She  was  a  heathen  and 
a  harlot  as  well.     Ruth  had  a  better  and  an  unblemished 


64       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

personal  reputation,  but  she  was  a  Moabitess,  and  what  did 
the  ancient  law  say  about  the  Moabites?  "An  Ammonite  or 
Moabite  shall  not  enter  into  the  assembly  of  Jehovah;  even 
to  the  tenth  generation  shall  none  belonging  to  them  enter 
into  the  assembly  of  Jehovah  forever.  .  .  .  Thou  shalt  not 
seek  their  peace  nor  their  prosperity  all  thy  days  for- 
ever." 1*2  Yet  these  two  women,  one  very  guilty  and  one 
very  good,  but  both  of  them  heathen  and  under  the  ban  of 
the  sacred  law,  had  come  into  the  line  of  the  ancestry  of 
Jesus.  He  had  heathen  blood  in  his  veins,  and  worse  than 
heathen  blood.  Before  these  two  women  had  come  into  the 
line  a  prostitute  had  become  the  mother  of  one  of  the  fore- 
fathers of  Jesus,  and  after  these  two  women  had  come  into 
the  line  an  adulteress  had  given  birth  to  another  of  his 
fathers  according  to  the  flesh. 

We  are  glad  that  Matthew  has  chosen  to  record  the  names 
of  these  women  in  the  genealogy.  There  they  stand  to  prove 
that  Jesus  was  not  free  from  "taints  of  blood"  in  his  human 
ancestry,  and  that  whatever  perfection  of  human  character 
he  attained  was  reached  not  by  the  aid  of  perfect  purity 
of  heredity,  but  in  despite  of  a  heavy  handicap  of  sensuality 
and  sin  handed  down  to  him  through  human  weakness  and 
moral  failure  and  all  the  black  catalogue  of  crime.  He  had 
no  advantage  of  us  in  his  humanity.  It  may  be  that  some 
of  us  have  advantage  of  him.  Anyway,  no  matter  what 
any  man's  heredity  may  be,  he  need  not  lose  hope  of  his 
salvation  and  of  his  possible  purity  and  perfection  of 
Christian  character  as  long  as  this  first  page  stands  here  in 
the  first  Gospel.  Sin,  sorrow,  shame  are  all  chronicled  here 
in  the  beginning  of  Matthew's  record ;  and  yet  the  genealogy 
ends  with  Jesus.  It  might  symbolize  the  history  of  the  race: 
sin,  sorrow,  shame  all  along  the  line,  but  salvation  in  the  end. 
(2)  Matthew  alone  tells  the  story  of  the  Eastern  Magi. 
The  first  to  herald  the  coming  of  the  King  and  to  acknowl- 
edge his  claims  to  homage  and  royal  gifts  were  these  for- 

'*"  Deut.  23.  3,  6. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        €5 

eigiiers  from  a  far  land.    Gentiles  were  the  first  to  proclaim 
him  who  was  come  to  be  King  of  the  Jews.^^^ 

(3)  Matthew  alone  records  how  John  the  Baptist  inveighs 
against  all  Jewish  feeling  of  security  in  racial  prerogatives 
and  how  he  assures  his  hearers  that  God  can  raise  up  chil- 
dren unto  Abraham  from  the  very  stones  of  the  desert.  ^** 
Abraham's  race  henceforth  would  not  be  the  Jewish  race 
alone,  but  it  would  be  recruited  from  the  waste  places  and 
from  the  waste  products  of  the  earth.  Gentiles  would  be 
raised  up  of  God  to  represent  the  true  faith  of  Father 
Abraham. 

(4)  Matthew  continually  shows  that  where  the  Jews  had 
failed  to  recognize  the  Messiah  and  honor  the  King,  the 
Gentiles  had  done  better  than  they.  In  the  very  beginning 
the  babe  was  driven  out  of  Palestine  by  the  Jews,  but  found 
a  refuge  among  the  Egyptians. ^^^  He  sojourned  in  the  land 
of  bondage  for  a  time,  even  as  his  race  had  done  in  the  days 
between  Joseph  and  Moses.  He  came  out  from  the  land  of 
darkness  and  of  bondage  into  the  Promised  Land,  even  as 
so  many  of  the  sons  of  God  have  done  in  their  spiritual 
experience.  In  the  days  of  his  active  ministry  when  the 
Jews  were  unbelievers  Jesus  said  to  a  Canaanitish  woman, 
a  Gentile,  "Great  is  thy  faith  !'V*^  and  upon  another  occa- 
sion he  said  to  another  Gentile,  a  Roman  centurion,  "I  have 
not  found  so  great  faith  ...  in  Israel."  ^^"^  When  the 
Jews  clamored  for  the  death  of  Jesus,  it  was  Pilate's  wife, 
a  Gentile,  who  sent  word,  "Have  nothing  to  do  with  that 
righteous  man."  i'*^  The  Jews  reviled  the  Crucified  One,  but 
the  Roman  guards  said,  "Truly  this  was  the  Son  of  God."  ^^^ 

(5)  Matthew  is  not  so  blinded  by  his  Jewish  prejudices 
that  he  is  unwilling  to  recognize  the  facts,  and  he  is  the  more 
ready  to  give  the  Gentiles  their  due  credit  because  of  his 

"*  Matt.  2.  1-12.  "'  Matt.  8.  10. 

"*  Matt.  3.  9.  "•  Matt  27.  19. 

'**Matt.  2.  14,  15.  "»Matt.  27.  54. 
'*"  Matt  15.  28. 


66       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

memory  of  some  things  which  the  Master  had  said.  He 
records  those  sayings  of  Jesus  which  point  to  an  impartial 
and  unprejudiced  preference  of  the  Gentiles  with  the  dis- 
ciple's fidelity  to  the  spirit  and  teaching  of  the  Lord. 

He  tells  us  how  Jesus  declared  that  the  centurion's  faith 
was  only  an  earnest  of  the  faith  which  multitudes  of  the 
Gentiles  would  exercise  in  the  coming  days  :  "I  say  unto  you, 
that  many  shall  come  from  the  east  and  the  west,  and  shall 
sit  down  with  Abraham,  and  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  in  the  king- 
dom of  heaven:  but  the  sons  of  the  kingdom  shall  be  cast 
forth  into  the  outer  darkness."  ^^^  The  Gentiles  will  flock 
in ;  the  Jews  will  be  cast  out. 

Matthew  has  recorded  that  Jesus  declared  that  Tyre  and 
Sidon  would  have  repented  if  they  had  had  the  opportunities 
of  Chorazin  and  Bethsaida;^^^  and  that  it  would  be  more 
tolerable  for  those  Gentile  cities  than  for  the  Jewish  cities 
in  the  Day  of  Judgment.  Unrepentant  Sodom  would  find 
more  tolerable  judgment  than  unrepentant  Capernaum. ^^^ 

Matthew  has  recorded  the  parable  of  the  vineyard,  clos- 
ing with  the  words,  "The  Kingdom  of  God  shall  be  taken 
away  from  you,  and  shall  be  given  to  a  nation  bringing  forth 
the  fruits  thereof."  ^^^  The  Jews  had  rejected  the  King's 
Son,  and  the  kingdom  would  be  taken  away  from  them. 

In  the  parable  of  the  king's  marriage  feast  for  his  son, 
there  is  the  suggestion  of  the  same  grim  truth;  for,  when 
those  first  bidden  had  refused  to  come,  the  king  sent  his 
servants  "unto  the  partings  of  the  highways"  to  find 
guests.i^^  The  first  missionaries  followed  Paul  along  the 
highways  of  the  nations  with  their  invitation  to  all  the 
Gentile  peoples  to  come  and  partake  of  the  gospel  feast. 

Their  warrant  for  so  doing  was  found  in  the  great  com- 

«°Matt.  8.  II,  12. 
'"Matt.  II.  21. 
"'Matt.  II.  23,  24. 
""  Matt.  21.  43. 
*"  Matt  22.  9. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        67 

mission  which  Matthew  alone  records.  "J^sus  came  to  them 
and  spake  unto  them,  saying,  All  authority  hath  been  given 
unto  me  in  heaven  and  on  earth.  Go  ye  therefore,  and  make 
disciples  of  all  the  nations."  ^^^  Their  mission  was  not  to  be 
limited  to  the  Jewish  race:  it  was  to  include  all  the  nations 
of  the  earth.  They  were  not  to  circumcise  their  converts 
and  make  them  Jews,  but  they  were  to  baptize  them  and 
make  them  Christians.  They  were  not  to  labor  to  glorify  or 
to  increase  the  numbers  of  any  particular  people  or  race. 
They  were  to  include  all  peoples  in  their  propaganda  and  to 
unite  them  all  in  one  Christian  Church. 

This  Gospel  is  written  primarily  for  the  Jews :  but  it  is  the 
Gospel  of  Hope  for  all  the  Gentiles;  and  these  two  seemingly 
contradictory  but  really  consistent  elements  give  the  Gospel 
its  impartial  and  catholic  character,  lift  it  "outside  the  con- 
tests of  the  apostolic  time,"  ^^^  and  make  it  the  Gospel  of 
Christ's  Church. 

9.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  the  Church. 

(i)  The  word  eKKXrjola,  "church,"  occurs  sixty-eight 
times  in  the  epistles,  twenty-three  times  in  the  book  of  Acts, 
twenty  times  in  the  book  of  Revelation,  and  only  three  times 
in  the  Gospels ;  and  each  of  these  three  occurrences  is  in  the 
Gospel  according  to  Matthew.  As  the  only  Gospel  which 
mentions  the  church  by  name,  it  may  be  distinguished  from 
the  others  by  that  fact. 

(2)  Matthew  alone  has  preserved  the  promise  that  the 
church  founded  upon  Peter  and  Peter's  faith  would  prevail 
against  all  its  future  foes.*'*'^ 

(3)  He  alone  has  recorded  the  Master's  suggestions  con- 
cerning church  discipline.^^^  He  alone  has  the  command  to 
institute  the  ordinance  of  baptism  as  an  initiatory  rite  in 
church  membership.!'^® 

10.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  the  Publican. 

"•  Matt.  28.  18,  19.  •"  Matt.  18.  17. 

'"Julicher,  Einleitung,  p.  194.         '"Matt.  28.  19. 
•"Matt.  16.  18. 


68       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

We  would  expect  to  find  some  trace  of  Matthew's  pro- 
fession in  his  writing.  It  has  been  suggested  that  his  ac- 
curacy and  his  effective  arrangement  of  his  materials  bear 
evidence  to  his  acquaintance  with  business  ledgers  and 
bookkeeping.  However,  we  look  for  some  more  particular 
indications  of  the  taxgatherer's  interest  and  observation. 

( I )  We  notice  that  Matthew  is  the  only  one  of  the  gospel 
writers  who  has  recorded  that  saying  of  Jesus  to  the  Phari- 
sees, "John  came  unto  you  in  the  way  of  righteousness,  and 
ye  believed  him  not;  but  the  publicans  and  the  harlots  be- 
lieved him."  160  Did  Matthew  the  publican  cherish  such  a 
saying  in  memory  when  others  had  forgotten  it  ?  He  would 
rejoice  in  the  Master's  recognition  of  the  publicans'  ready 
acceptance  of  the  good  news  of  the  gospel.  He  would  be 
glad  to  record  the  fact  that  a  believing  publican  was  better 
than  an  unbelieving  Pharisee  in  the  eyes  of  Jesus.  He  alone 
has  preserved  this  saying  of  the  Lord. 

The  Pharisees  hated  the  publicans,  and  Matthew  the  pub- 
lican seems  to  take  delight  in  recording  denunciations  of  the 
Pharisees.  Luke  tells  us  that  John  the  Baptist  met  the  multi- 
tudes who  flocked  into  the  wilderness  to  hear  him  with  the 
discouraging  greeting,  "Ye  offspring  of  vipers,  who  warned 
you  to  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come?"!®^  Matthew  takes 
pains  to  make  it  clear  that  it  was  not  the  general  multitude 
of  the  people  whom  John  so  addressed,  but  only  the  Phari- 
sees and  Sadducees  whom  he  saw  among  them.^^^  Over 
against  that  denunciation  by  the  Forerunner  at  the  beginning 
of  the  Gospel  Matthew  alone  has  recorded  that  great  de- 
nunciation of  the  scribes  and  the  Pharisees  by  the  Master 
toward  the  ministry's  close,  culminating  with  the  same 
epithet  used  by  John,  "Ye  serpents,  ye  offspring  of  vipers, 
how  shall  ye  escape  the  judgment  of  hell?^®^    Who  were 

'*  Matt  21.  32. 
"^  Luke  3.  7. 
'•"  Matt.  3.  7. 
•**  Matt  23-  33. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        69 

these  Pharisees?  They  were  the  ones  who  asked  Pilate  to 
set  a  watch  over  the  tomb  of  Jesus,  Matthew  says.^^* 
They  were  the  ones  who  called  Jesus  a  deceiver,  Matthew 
says.^^°  They  were  the  ones  whom  the  Master  called  hypo- 
crites and  denounced  in  unmeasured  terms,  Matthew  says.^^^ 
We  are  dependent  upon  him  for  these  items  of  information. 
As  a  publican  he  was  perfectly  willing  to  preserve  them  in 
his  Gospel. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  the  first  two  chapters  are  a 
refutation  of  Pharisaic  calumnies.  Jesus  was  born  of  a 
virgin,  he  came  out  of  Egypt,  he  was  from  Nazareth;  but 
none  of  these  things  were  to  his  discredit.  They  were  super- 
naturally  ordered.  Jesus  was  divinely  guided  through  all 
his  life.  The  calumnies  founded  upon  these  facts  fade  away 
in  the  light  of  the  whole  of  the  truth.  The  Pharisees  might 
call  Abraham  their  father,^®''  and  they  might  call  themselves 
the  sons  of  the  Kingdom ;  but  they  would  be  cast  forth  into 
the  outer  darkness  to  weep  and  gnash  their  teeth,  neverthe- 
less.*®® Had  they  not  said  that  Jesus  cast  out  demons  by 
the  prince  of  demons?*®^  Had  they  not  claimed  that  Jesus 
was  the  personal  representative  and  partner  of  Beelzebub  ?^'^^ 
They  would  have  a  chance  to  find  out  by  personal  acquaint- 
ance who  Beelzebub  was  and  what  sort  of  people  represented 
him,  when  they  were  at  home  with  him  in  hell.  Had  not 
Jesus  called  these  sons  of  the  kingdom  the  sons  of  hell?*^* 
Had  not  Jesus  told  his  disciples  to  beware  of  their  teach- 
ing P^'^^  Matthew  the  publican  had  winced  under  the  scorn 
of  these  Pharisees  many  a  time ;  and  he  had  seen  them  wince 

••*  Matt.  27.  62. 

•"Matt  27.  63. 

•"Matt.  23.  13,  IS,  23,  25,  27,  29,  33. 

•"  Matt.  3.  9. 

•"  Matt.  8.  12. 

"*Matt.  9.  34. 

""  Matt.  12.  24. 

•"Matt  23.  15. 

'"Matt  16.  12. 


70       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

many  a  time  under  the  Master's  scorn.  As  a  converted  pub- 
lican he  took  grim  delight  in  recording  some  of  the  Master's 
words  concerning  them. 

(2)  Matthew  is  the  only  one  of  the  gospel  writers  who 
has  told  us  about  that  payment  of  the  temple  tax  at  Caper- 
naum. The  tax  collectors  asked  Peter  if  his  teacher  would 
pay  the  tax;  and  Jesus  said  to  Simon,  "What  thinkest  thou, 
Simon?  the  kings  of  the  earth,  from  whom  do  they  receive 
toll  or  tribute  ?"  ^'^^  We  can  imagine  how  Matthew  was  all 
alert  to  hear  the  answer  to  that  question.  Here  was  a  matter 
which  concerned  him.  He  had  been  a  tax-collector  a  large 
part  of  his  life.  The  incident  awoke  within  him  all  the 
memories  and  the  associations  of  his  former  career.  He 
remembered  Peter's  reply  and  the  Master's  interpretation 
of  it,  and  how  the  tax  was  paid  with  the  proceeds  of  the 
fish  Peter  caught.  He,  the  publican,  is  the  only  evangelist 
to  record  these  things. 

(3)  We  remember  again  that  when  the  Herodians  asked 
Jesus,  "Is  it  lawful  to  give  tribute  unto  Caesar  ?"  both  Mark 
and  Luke  in  recording  the  incident  say  that  Jesus  said, 
"Bring  me  a  penny,"  but  Matthew  alone  tells  us  that  Jesus 
commanded,  "Show  me  the  tribute  money,  i'^^  He  used  the 
oflEicial  term,  to  vo^iofia  rov  Krjvaov,  the  established  and  legal 
requirement  of  tribute.  He  had  become  accustomed  to  that 
stilted  term  in  the  red-tape  phraseology  of  the  tax-collector's 
booth;  and  he  alone  is  careful  to  say  that  the  exact  coin 
which  represented  the  legal  tribute  money  about  which  they 
questioned  lay  in  the  hand  of  Jesus  when  he  made  the  reply 
which  sent  them  away  marveling  and  silenced  for  the  time. 

(4)  We  remember  again  that  Matthew  has  a  double  ac- 
count of  the  Master's  declarations  concerning  the  taking  of 
oathsji'^^  and  that  we  find  no  parallels  to  these  paragraphs 
in  the  other  Gospels.    In  the  neighborhood  of  the  taxgath- 

"» Matt.  17.  25. 
"*Matt.  22.  19. 
'"Matt.  5.  34-37;  23.  16-22. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        71 

erer's  booth  there  had  been  much  quibbHng  about  the  greater 
or  less  validity  of  certain  oaths.  Matthew  had  heard  much 
swearing  and  forswearing.  He  may  have  asked  the  Master 
for  some  definite  and  authoritative  statement  on  this  subject. 
When  that  statement  was  given  he  deemed  it  of  sufficient 
importance  to  be  recorded.  He  put  down  two  distinct  utter- 
ances of  Jesus  in  this  matter.  No  other  evangelist  records 
them.    Matthew  the  publican  has  preserved  them  to  all  time. 

(5)  In  the  sending  out  of  the  twelve  apostles  Mark  says 
that  Jesus  told  them  to  take  no  brass  or  copper  money, 
XaXKOv,  in  their  purse.^'^®  In  the  account  given  by  Luke 
the  Master  commands  the  apostles  to  take  no  silver,  dgyvQiov, 
for  their  journey.^'^'^  When  we  turn  to  Matthew  to  find  this 
command  we  notice  that  he  exhausts  all  the  possibilities  in 
the  coinage  of  the  country  at  this  point  and  says  that  the 
apostles  were  to  possess  neither  gold  nor  silver  nor  brass, 
Xpvoov  ^Tjdi:  dpyvpov  firjdi  ;^;aA«dv.i78  jg  t^ig  difference  to  be 
accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  the  publican  was  more  inter- 
ested in  money  matters  than  either  Mark  or  Luke,  and  that 
he  therefore  noticed  very  carefully  that  Jesus  had  ruled 
out  all  the  larger  as  well  as  the  lesser  coins  of  the  realm  when 
he  sent  out  the  twelve  to  represent  him  among  the  peasants 
of  Palestine  ?  This  seems  to  us  more  probable  than  that  any 
of  these  words  should  have  been  later  editorial  additions  to 
Matthew's  originally  single  term. 

(6)  We  believe  this  the  more  readily  since  it  is  apparent 
throughout  the  first  Gospel  that  Matthew  is  interested  in 
large  sums  of  money  as  well  as  in  smaller  amounts.  He 
alone  has  the  parable  of  the  talents.  In  the  Gospel  according 
to  Mark  only  three  coins  are  mentioned,  the  mite  and  the 
farthing  and  the  penny.  These  were  the  smallest  coins  in 
circulation  in  Palestine.  In  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke 
we  find  the  parable  of  the  pounds,  dealing  with  larger  sums 

"•  Mark  6.  8. 
"'  Luke  9.  3. 
'^''  Matt  10.  9. 


72       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

of  money.  Matthew  introduces  us  to  the  talent,  which  was 
worth  seventy  times  as  much  as  the  pound  and  at  least  eight 
thousand  times  as  much  as  the  penny.  Matthew  had  been 
handling  money  both  in  smaller  and  more  considerable  sums 
as  a  publican;  and  we  are  not  surprised,  therefore,  to  find 
that  he  mentions  more  coins  and  rarer  coins  and  larger  sums 
of  money  than  the  other  evangelists  do,  and  that  he  is  more 
interested  in  money  matters  and  more  careful  in  naming 
money  sums  than  they  seem  to  be. 

At  these  points,  then,  we  suspect  the  special  interest  of 
the  tax-collector  to  have  been  manifested  in  the  record. 
They  may  be  deemed  sufficient  to  warrant  us  in  naming  this 
Gospel  the  Gospel  of  the  Publican. 

II.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Systematic  Arrangement. 

We  have  suggested  that  the  Gospel  written  by  a  publican 
would  be  a  Gospel  of  systematic  arrangement.  As  compared 
with  the  other  synoptics  it  well  deserves  this  name.  E.  A. 
Thomson  says  of  it :  "It  has  a  methodical  arrangement ;  such 
as  we  should  expect  from  one  who,  as  a  collector  of  taxes, 
had  been  a  man  of  business,  trained  to  system  and  exactness. 
Matthew  does  not  run  on  in  the  order  of  time,  as  a  mere 
annalist,  but  groups  discourses,  parables,  miracles,  and 
prophecies  by  themselves,  in  a  topical  order,  and  with  a  cer- 
tain power  of  combination  that  produces  an  admirable 
effect."  1'^^  Godet,  with  his  usual  poetic  insight  and  scien- 
tific accuracy,  has  put  the  same  truth  in  these  words :  "Luke 
is  in  each  case  like  a  botanist  who  prefers  to  contemplate  a 
flower  in  the  very  place  of  its  birth,  and  in  the  midst  of  its 
natural  surroundings.  Matthew  is  like  the  gardener  who, 
with  a  view  to  some  special  object,  puts  together  large  and 
magnificent  bouquets."  ^^^ 

As  examples  of  these  bouquets,  we  notice:  (i)  This 
is  the  Gospel  of  the  nine  beatitudes.  There  are  three  times 
three  of  them ;  and  no  equal  cluster  can  be  found  in  any  of 

""  The  Four  Evangelists,  p.  24. 
'^''New  Testament  Studies,  p.  i6. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        73 

the  other  evangelists.     Luke  has   four  beatitudes  in  one 
group,  and  four  woes  to  counterbalance  them. 

(2)  This  is  the  Gospel  of  seven  consecutive  parables,  in 
chapter  thirteen.  They  are  all  parables  of  the  Kingdom. 
Six  of  them  begin  with  the  statement,  "The  kingdom  of 
heaven  is  like  unto  — ."  The  first  alone  lacks  this  formula, 
and  it,  the  parable  of  the  sower,  is  introductory  to  the  history 
of  the  Kingdom.  Jesus  sows  the  seed,  makes  the  beginning. 
Then  the  Kingdom  in  its  development  and  history  and  con- 
summation is  pictured  in  the  six  succeeding  parables.  Four 
of  these  parables  Jesus  gave  to  the  multitude:  the  remaining 
three  he  gave  to  the  disciples  alone. 

The  number  seven  stands  for  completeness,  and  these 
seven  parables  give  us  the  foundation,  the  fortunes,  and  the 
final  fate  of  the  Kingdom.  The  sower  and  his  seed  present 
the  beginning  experiences  of  the  Kingdom;  the  tares,  its 
appearance  through  all  its  earth  history;  the  mustard  seed, 
its  marvelous  growth ;  the  leaven,  its  all-pervading  and  per- 
fect victory ;  the  treasure,  its  incomparable  value ;  the  pearl, 
its  supreme  reward  of  any  sacrifice  made  for  it;  the  drag-net, 
the  end  of  its  earth  history.  It  is  a  bouquet  of  flowers,  a 
cluster  of  gems,  a  galaxy  of  stars.  No  group  of  equal  beauty 
and  worth  can  be  found  in  any  other  Gospel. 

(3)  This  is  the  Gospel  of  ten  consecutive  miracles.  One 
half  of  the  miracles  which  Matthew  records  are  found 
grouped  in  the  eighth  and  ninth  chapters.  A  leper  is 
cleansed,  a  paralytic  is  instantly  cured,  a  fever  is  cooled  and 
routed  at  His  touch,  demons  are  expelled,  stormy  waves  are 
quieted  at  his  command,  the  dead  is  brought  back  to  life,  the 
bHnd  are  restored  to  sight,  the  dumb  recovers  his  speech,  all 
manner  of  disease  and  all  manner  of  sickness  is  healed. 
How  are  these  marvels  accomplished?  By  the  touch  of  his 
hand,  by  a  word  of  command,  usually  in  his  presence,  but 
sometimes  at  a  distance.  Matthew  masses  them  together, 
that  ten  such  narratives  in  close  succession  may  convince  all 
men  that  this  is  in  very  truth  the  Messiah. 


74       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

(4)  This  is  the  Gospel  of  five  continuous  discourses.  We 
will  look  at  these  later.  We  simply  notice  them  now  as 
groups  of  consecutive  sayings  of  Jesus  which  are  not  to  be 
paralleled  in  the  other  Gospels. 

Matthew  evidently  is  not  careful  to  be  chronological  in  the 
record  of  his  material.  He  prefers  to  group  together  sayings 
and  doings  from  various  places  and  times  into  impressive, 
massive  aggregations.  He  systematizes  his  material,  ar- 
ranges it  under  suitable  heads,  presents  it  on  the  topical 
principle.  For  example,  in  chapters  five  to  seven  we  have 
Jesus  presenting  the  constitution  of  the  Kingdom;  in  chap- 
ters eight  and  nine,  Jesus  the  miracle-working  King  over 
disease  and  devils  and  death,  over  nature  and  man;  in 
chapter  ten,  Jesus  the  Master  of  the  twelve;  in  chapter 
eleven,  Jesus  answering  the  doubt  of  the  Baptist  and  the  un- 
belief of  the  Galilsean  cities ;  in  chapter  twelve  Jesus  confut- 
ing his  adversaries ;  in  chapter  thirteen,  Jesus  presenting  the 
Kingdom  in  parables. 

Matthew  begins  his  record  of  miracles  with  the  cure  of 
the  leper,  a  symbol  of  cleansing  from  sin,  and  he  closes  it 
with  the  blasting  of  the  fig-tree,  a  symbol  of  judgment  upon 
sin.  He  begins  his  record  of  the  parables  with  the  sower 
scattering  his  seed,  the  preaching  of  the  good  news  of  the 
Kingdom  to  men,  and  he  closes  it  with  the  parable  of  the 
talents,  setting  forth  the  sure  judgment  upon  men  according 
to  their  use  of  the  Kingdom's  privileges.  There  is  seeming 
intent  in  this  arrangement.  Matthew  is  not  following  the 
order  of  events  so  much  as  the  order  of  his  own  purpose  and 
plan.  This  systematic  arrangement  is  apparent  in  Mat- 
thew's preference  for  the  sacred  numbers,  three  and  seven. 
The  Gospel  of  Systematic  Arrangement  becomes  the  Gospel 
of  the  Sacred  Numbers. 

12.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  the  Threes  and  Sevens. 

( I )  In  the  first  chapter  we  have  a  genealogy  which  is  not 
an  accurate  genealogy.  The  names  are  grouped  into  three 
divisions  of  fourteen,  so  that  the  name  of  Jesus  comes  as  the 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        75 

seventh  name  at  the  end  of  six  sevens.  In  order  to  make 
this  grouping  of  three  fourteens,  three  times  two  times 
seven,  Matthew  has  omitted  several  names  from  the  list. 
Why  has  he  done  it  ?  It  has  been  suggested  that  Matthew  is 
making  a  sort  of  numerical  acrostic  on  the  name  David. 
In  the  Hebrew  name  "David,"  in,  there  are  three  letters, 
and  the  numerical  value  of  the  three  letters  is  44-6+4=14, 
and  this  value  is  multiplied  by  the  sum  of  units,  14X3,  to 
make  the  total.  It  is  an  artificial  procedure,  but  thoroughly 
Jewish ;  and  in  this  way  Matthew  makes  his  genealogy  show 
that  Jesus  is  in  truth  the  son  of  David.^^^ 

It  has  been  suggested,  again,  that  the  number  of  stations 
recorded  in  the  wilderness  journeying  of  the  Israelites  from 
Egypt  to  Canaan  was  forty-two ;  and  Matthew  gives  forty- 
two  names  in  his  genealogical  list  in  order  to  point  out  the 
fact  that  the  pilgrim  people  of  God,  starting  from  Abraham 
the  father  of  the  faithful,  did  not  find  the  object  of  their 
faith  and  the  final  resting  place  of  their  hope  until  they  came 
in  the  forty-second  generation  to  Jesus.  The  discovery  of 
these  ingenious  parallels  would  have  astonished  Matthew 
in  all  probability,  and  they  do  not  seem  very  convincing  to 
us.  We  know  no  better  reason  for  this  arrangement  of 
threes  and  sevens  than  Matthew's  evident  Jewish  fondness 
for  these  numbers. 

(2)  Notice  the  seven  petitions  in  the  Disciples'  Prayer. 
Luke  has  only  five  of  them.  We  are  told  that  Matthew's 
sevens  are  usually  divisible  into  fours  and  threes,  setting 
forth  the  human  and  the  divine  aspects  of  the  matter  in- 
volved. This  division  is  clearly  apparent  in  the  petitions  of 
the  Disciples'  Prayer.  Three  of  them  are  for  the  divine 
glory,  "Hallowed  be  thy  name.  Thy  kingdom  come.  Thy  will 
be  done,"  and  four  are  for  our  human  need :  "Give  us  bread, 
forgive  our  sins,  lead  us  not  into  temptation,  deliver  us  from 
the  evil  one." 


'■"So,  Gfrorer,  Die  heilige  Saga,  II,  p.  9  note;  and  G.  H.  Box, 
The  Interpreter,  vol.  ii,  p.  199. 


76       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

(3)  There  are  seven  beatitudes  which  have  to  do  with  per- 
sonal character.  The  other  two  pronounce  beatitudes  upon 
those  who  are  persecuted  because  they  have  the  character 
set  forth  in  the  preceding  seven.  Of  these,  the  first  four 
present  characteristics  of  our  humanity:  poor  in  spint, 
mourning,  meek,  hungering  and  thirsting  after  righteousness. 
The  promise  is  that  such  shall  be  filled :  and  when  they  are 
filled  they  become  partakers  of  the  divine  nature  and  may 
exercise  some  of  the  divine  prerogatives.  The  other  three 
beatitudes  mount  from  the  human  to  the  divine  plane  of 
blessedness.  They  who  experience  them  are  merciful  even 
as  the  Father  is  merciful,  are  pure  even  as  God  is  pure,  are 
peacemakers  even  as  God  is  the  God  of  peace. 

(4)  In  the  thirteenth  chapter  there  are  the  seven  parables 
of  the  kingdom.  (5)  In  the  twenty-third  chapter  there  are 
the  seven  woes. 

(6)  We  think  there  are  seven  clear  divisions  of  the 
book,  as  we  shall  see  when  we  come  to  outline  its  contents. 
(7)  We  recall  further  the  seven  demons  of  12.  45,  the  seven 
fold  forgiveness  of  18.  21,  22,  the  seven  brethren  of  22. 
25,  the  seven  loaves  and  the  seven  baskets  of  fragments  in 

15-  34,  37- 
The  threes  are  more  numerous  than  the  sevens.    We  note 

a  partial  list  of  them,  three  fourteens  in  the  genealogy, 

1.  17;  three  incidents  in  the  infancy — the  visit  of  the  Wise 
Men,  the  flight  into  Egypt,  and  the  return  to  Nazareth, 

2.  1-23 ;  three  narratives  prior  to  the  pubHc  ministry,  3.  i  to 
4.  11;  three  temptations,  4.  i-ii;  three  commands  concern- 
ing religious  acts — alms,  prayer,  and  fasting,  6.  1-18;  three 
prohibitions,  6.  19  to  7.  6;  three  prayer  promises,  7.  7; 
three  exhortations,  7.  7-15  ;  a  threefold  "in  thy  name,"  7.  22; 
three  miracles  of  healing — leprosy,  paralysis,  fever,  8.  1-15; 
three  miracles  of  power — in  the  natural,  demonic,  and  spir- 
itual spheres,  8.  23  to  9.  8 ;  three  miracles  of  restoration — to 
life,  sight,  and  speech,  9.  18-33;  three  times,  "Fear  not," 
10.  26,  28,  31 ;  three  answers  to  the  question  about  fasting, 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW       y7 

9.  14-17;  three  times,  "is  not  worthy  of  me,"  10.  37,  38;  three 
signs  to  the  Pharisees — Jonah,  Ninevites,  Queen  of  the 
South,  12.  38-42;  three  parables  of  the  fields — sower,  tares, 
mustard  seed,  13.  1-32;  three  sayings  about  the  "Httle  ones," 
18.  6,  10,  14;  three  parables  of  prophetic  import,  21.  28  to 
22.  14;  three  questions  put  to  Jesus,  22.  15-40;  three  parables 
of  warning,  24.  43  to  25.  30;  three  prayers  in  Gethsemane, 
26.  39-44;  three  denials  of  Peter,  26.  69-75;  three  questions 
of  Pilate,  27.  17,  22,  23;  the  last  words  to  the  disciples — a 
claim,  a  charge,  a  promise ;  and  of  these  the  charge  a  three- 
fold charge,  to  make  disciples,  to  baptize,  and  to  teach ;  and 
of  these  the  baptism  to  be  into  the  threefold  name  of  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  28.  18-20. 

Some  of  these  occurrences  of  the  Jewish  sacred  numbers 
are  easily  accounted  for  on  other  grounds,  but  some  of  them 
seem  in  both  the  usage  of  Jesus  and  of  Matthew  to  evidence 
the  Jewish  preference  for  these  triple  and  septiform  groups. 
All  Jews  were  prone  to  make  use  of  them,  and  Matthew  in 
his  Gospel  followed  the  custom  which  was  most  natural  to 
himself  and  which  was  most  acceptable  to  his  race.  Possibly 
we  may  find  another  Jewish  trait  in  the  first  Gospel  in  its 
record  of  divine  guidance  in  dreams. 

13.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Dreams. 

No  other  evangelist  records  any  dreams,  but  Matthew 
introduces  six  of  them  into  his  narrative.  We  know  that 
in  the  Old  Testament  the  dream  was  considered  one  legiti- 
mate and,  indeed,  ordinary  method  of  the  communication  of 
the  divine  will.  We  read  that  "when  Saul  inquired  of  Je- 
hovah, Jehovah  answered  him  not,  neither  by  dreams,  nor  by 
Urim,  nor  by  prophets."  ^^^  We  read  that  Jehovah  spake  to 
Moses  mouth  to  mouth,  but  he  promised  to  speak  to  the 
other  prophets  in  Israel  in  visions  and  dreams.'*^  We  re- 
member that  promise  quoted  by  Peter  at  Pentecost :  "Your 
sons  and  your  daughters  shall  prophesy,  your  old  men  shall 

"'  I  Sam.  28.  6. 
'"Num.  12.  6. 


78       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

dream  dreams,  your  young  men  shall  see  visions."  '^^  It 
was  an  Old  Testament  promise,  but  Peter  declared  that  it 
was  to  be  fulfilled  in  New  Testament  times.  Matthew  seems 
to  have  been  of  the  same  opinion. 

In  the  early  pages  of  the  Old  Testament  we  have  the  story 
of  Joseph  the  dreamer.  He  had  wonderful  visions,  and  they 
brought  him  both  into  great  difficulties  and  into  great  deliver- 
ances. We  owe  it  to  Matthew  that  on  the  first  pages  of  our 
New  Testament  we  find  the  story  of  another  Joseph  the 
dreamer.  He  too  has  strange  visions  and  they  bring  him 
into  great  distress  while  at  the  same  time  they  promise  him 
great  deUverance. 

( 1 )  He  was  a  righteous  man,  and  he  had  a  righteous  man's 
dreams.  When  he  was  minded  to  put  Mary  away  the  angel 
of  the  Lord  appeared  to  him  in  a  dream  and  told  him  she 
was  to  be  the  mother  of  the  Saviour  of  men.i^^  It  is  not 
every  man  who  sees  an  angel  in  his  dream.  No  other  man 
ever  had  such  a  message. 

(2)  When  Herod  sought  to  take  the  young  child's  life 
the  Lord  himself  appeared  to  Joseph  in  a  dream  and  warned 
him  to  flee  into  Egypt.^^^ 

(3)  Again  the  angel  of  the  Lord  appeared  in  a  dream  to 
Joseph  in  Egypt,  telling  him  to  take  the  young  child  and  his 
mother  and  return  into  the  land  of  Israel. ^^'^ 

(4)  Another  dream  warned  Joseph  to  withdraw  into  Gali- 
lee, and  it  was  thus  that  Jesus  became  a  Nazarene.^^^  Thus 
we  see  that  at  every  important  crisis  in  this  time  of  his  life 
Joseph  was  guided  by  dreams.  It  surely  is  an  interesting 
fact  that  no  other  evangelist  has  recorded  any  of  these 
things. 

(5)  Matthew  has  put  two  other  most  important  revela- 
tions in  dreams  into  his  narrative,  and  both  of  them  are 
recorded  only  by  him.    These  were  both  granted  to  Gentiles. 

'"  Joel  2.  28.  "'  Matt.  2.  19,  20. 

""  Matt.  I.  20.  "*  Matt.  2.  23. 

*"  Matt.  2.  13. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        79 

The  Wise  Men  had  found  Jesus  in  Bethlehem.  Then  being 
warned  of  God  in  a  dream  that  they  should  not  return  to 
Herod,  they  departed  into  their  own  country  another  way.^^® 

(6)  Pilate  sat  upon  the  judgment  seat  and  the  people  were 
insisting  upon  the  execution  of  Jesus,  Then  his  wife, 
Claudia  Procla,  sent  to  him,  saying,  "Have  thou  nothing  to 
do  with  that  righteous  man ;  for  I  have  suffered  many  things 
this  day  in  a  dream  because  of  him."  1®*^  Five  times  at  the 
beginning  of  the  Gospel  and  once  again  at  the  close  of  the 
Gospel  divine  direction  is  given  in  a  dream.  Since  nothing 
corresponding  to  these  dreams  is  recorded  in  any  of  the 
other  Gospels,  we  may  call  the  First  Gospel  the  Gospel  of 
Dreams. 

14.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  the  Five  Great  Discourses. 

Each  of  these  five  great  discourses  is  followed  by  the 
formula,  "And  when  Jesus  had  finished  these  sayings." 

(i)  There  is  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  chapters  five  to 
seven,  in  which  Jesus  "lays  down  the  high  spiritual  laws  of 
the  kingdom  of  heaven.  There  are  no  rolling  clouds  as  at 
Sinai,  no  crashing  thunder,  no  careering  fires,  no  congre- 
gated wings  of  the  rushing  angelic  host;  yet  this  Galilaean 
hill,  with  its  calm  voice,  its  lowly  Teacher,  its  listening  multi- 
tude, its  lilies  sprinkled  on  the  green  grass,  is  the  Sinai  of  the 
New  Covenant.  Those  beatitudes  are  its  Decalogue,  those 
virtues  its  ritual.  Prayer  and  alms,  holiness  and  humbleness 
of  heart,  there  you  have  the  Leviticus  of  Christianity,  the 
Pentateuch  of  spiritual  worship."  ^®^ 

(2)  The  instruction  of  the  twelve  apostles,  chapter  ten. 

(3)  The  Kingdom  presented  in  parables,  chapter  thirteen. 

(4)  The  constitution  of  the  Church,  chapter  eighteen. 

(5)  The  eschatological  prophecies  and  parables,  chapters 
twenty-four  and  twenty-five.  These  five  discourses  set  forth 
the  new  law,  the  new  apostolate,  the  new  Kingdom,  the  new 

""•  Matt.  2.  12. 

""Matt.  27.  19. 

"'  Farrar,  Op.  cit.,  p.  42. 


8o       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

church,  the  consummation  of  all  things.  These  doubtless 
formed  the  main  topics  of  the  preaching  and  teaching  of 
Jesus. 

Sir  John  Hawkins  says,  "It  is  hard  to  believe  that  it  is  by 
accident  that  we  find  in  a  writer  with  the  Jewish  affinities  of 
Matthew  this  five-times  repeated  formula,  When  Jesus  had 
finished  these  sayings,"  and  he  calls  attention  to  the  parallel 
divisions  in  the  five  books  of  the  Pentateuch,  the  five  books 
of  the  Psalms,  the  five  Megilloth,  and  other  similar  groups. 
We  remember  that  Eusebius  tells  us  that  Papias  wrote  a 
commentary  on  the  Logia  of  Matthew  in  five  books,  and 
we  wonder  if  these  Five  Great  Discourses  with  their  iden- 
tical concluding  formula  may  not  represent  the  original  five- 
fold division  of  that  book. 

There  are,  however,  many  other  smaller  discourses  of 
Jesus  recorded  by  Matthew  which  are  only  less  valuable 
than  the  great  discourses  we  have  named.  The  eleventh 
chapter  has  the  eulogy  upon  John  the  Baptist,  the  woes  upon 
the  Galilsean  cities,  the  thanksgiving  for  the  revelation  to 
babes,  the  invitation  to  the  heavy-laden.  The  twelfth  chapter 
has  the  sayings  about  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath  and  the 
unpardonable  sin  and  idle  words  and  sign-seeking.  The 
fifteenth  chapter  has  the  attack  upon  the  traditions  of  the 
elders  and  the  hypocrisy  of  the  Pharisees.  The  sixteenth 
chapter  has  the  promise  of  the  keys  and  the  prophecy  of  the 
crucifixion.  The  nineteenth  chapter  contains  the  discussion 
concerning  divorce  and  the  peril  of  riches.  The  twentieth 
and  twenty-first  chapters  have  the  parables  of  impending 
judgment.  The  twenty- third  chapter  has  the  denunciation 
of  the  ecclesiastical  authorities  and  almost  deserves  to  rank 
in  importance  with  the  five  great  discourses  of  the  Gospel. 
One  fourth  of  the  contents  of  the  first  Gospel  is  represented 
by  these  discourses,  and  distinguish  it,  as  the  didactic  Gospel, 
from  the  other  synoptics.  We  see  Jesus  as  a  popular  orator 
in  these  pages,  and  have  examples  of  the  addresses  which 
gave  him  his  reputation  and  power  with  the  people.     The 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        8i 

first  Gospel  is  like  the  fourth  in  giving  so  much  of  its  space 
to  the  discourses  of  Jesus. 

15.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  the  Four  Great  Mountains. 

These  mountains  mark  the  four  culminating  points  in  the 
ministry  of  Jesus. 

( 1 )  The  mount  of  the  beatitudes.  "Seeing  the  multitudes, 
Jesus  went  up  into  the  mountain,"  ^^^  and  there  he  sat  down 
and  preached  the  mountain  sermon  of  the  Christian  faith, 
filled  with  far-reaching  visions  as  from  mountain  heights 
and  lofty  ideals  like  mountain  peaks. 

(2)  The  mount  of  transfiguration.  "Jesus  taketh  with 
him  Peter,  James,  and  John  his  brother,  and  bringeth  them 
up  into  a  high  mountain  apart."  ^^^  it  was  a  mountain  of 
prayer  and  a  mountain  of  vision,  a  mountain  of  the  Divine 
Presence,  a  "holy  mount,"  i»*  where  glorified  spirits  were 
seen  and  a  voice  was  borne  from  the  Majestic  Glory  out  of 
heaven  to  men. 

(3)  The  mount  of  prophecy.  "As  he  sat  on  the  mount 
of  Olives,  the  disciples  came  unto  him  privately,  saying.  Tell 
us,  when  shall  these  things  be?"i®^  From  that  mountain 
could  he  look  back  to  the  mount  of  transfiguration  and  see 
that  all  which  had  been  said  there  concerning  his  decease 
was  now  about  to  come  true?  Could  he  look  farther  still, 
back  to  the  mount  of  the  great  sermon  where  he  had  laid 
down  the  foundation  principles  upon  which  his  kingdom 
forever  must  stand?  Did  the  gladness  of  the  first  Galilaean 
ministry  and  the  glory  of  the  transfiguration  fill  his  heart 
as  he  thought  of  the  past?  Or,  on  this  mount  did  he  look 
forward  only,  and  was  his  heart  filled  with  dismay  as  he 
thought  of  all  his  disciples  must  endure  until  the  end  of 
the  age?  He  said  to  them,  "When  therefore  ye  see  the 
abomination  of  desolation    .    .    .    standing  in  the  holy  place, 


""Matt.  5-  I- 
'"Matt.  17.  I. 
'**2  Pet.  I.  18. 
"'Matt.  24.  3. 


82       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

.  .  .  then  let  them  that  are  in  Judaea  flee  unto  the  moun- 
tains." ^^^  There  they  would  find  a  place  of  refuge,  where 
he  had  found  peace  so  often  for  his  soul.  In  the  moun- 
tains God  and  heaven  would  seem  nearer,  prayer  would  be 
easier,  and  they  could  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  on  the 
clouds  of  heaven  with  power  and  great  glory. 

(4)  In  this  Gospel  the  last  appearance  of  Jesus  is  on  a 
mountain  top.  "The  eleven  disciples  went  into  Galilee,  unto 
the  mountain  where  Jesus  had  appointed  them."  ^^'^  There 
Jesus  showed  them  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth  and  the 
glory  of  them,  and  he  told  them  that  all  these  things  belonged 
to  him  and  he  could  give  them  to  whomsoever  he  would,  and 
he  commanded  them  to  go  forth  and  take  possession  of  them 
all  in  his  name.  All  authority  was  his,  and  he  would  give  it 
all  to  those  who  would  fall  down  and  worship  him  in  spirit 
and  in  truth.  If  they  obeyed  him  and  taught  what  he  com- 
manded, he  would  be  with  them  unto  the  consummation  of 
the  age.  Had  not  the  angel  said  to  Joseph  that  the  promise 
given  through  Isaiah  would  be  fulfilled  in  Mary's  son, 
"They  shall  call  his  name  Immanuel;  which  is,  being  in- 
terpreted, God  with  us"  ?  Now  the  Messiah  assures  his  dis- 
ciples that  that  promise,  fulfilled  in  his  presence  with  them 
through  his  ministry,  would  continue  to  be  fulfilled  for- 
evermore :  "Lo,  I  am  with  you  always,  even  unto  the  end  of 
the  world." 

Did  Jesus  think  as  he  said  these  things  of  that  vision 
in  the  wilderness  in  which  the  devil  had  taken  him  unto  an 
exceeding  high  mountain  and  tempted  him  with  the  promise 
of  an  easy  conquest  of  the  authority  he  had  gained  now 
through  crucifixion?  He  did  not  deceive  his  disciples  with 
any  promise  of  easy  victory:  but  he  promised  victory 
through  obedience,  even  if  obedience  should  be  learned 
through  suffering.  It  had  been  a  hard  road  to  travel  from 
that  mount  of  temptation  to  this  mount  of  the  great  commis- 

"^  Matt.  24.  15,  16. 
"'  Matt.  28.  16. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        83 

sion.  There  had  been  both  tribulation  and  transfiguration 
upon  the  way ;  but  now  his  work  was  done ;  and  the  victory 
had  been  won.  Upon  this  mountain-top  he  makes  public 
proclamation  of  that  fact;  and  it  is  upon  this  mountain-top 
of  resurrected  and  unrivaled  authority  that  Matthew  leaves 
him. 

Beside  these  four  mountains  of  the  high  points  of  the 
ministry  of  Jesus,  Matthew  has  (5)  the  mountain  of  the 
temptation  vision,  4.  8;  (6)  the  mountain  of  prayer,  14.  23; 
(7)  the  mountain  of  healing,  15.  29;  and  (8)  the  mount  of 
Olives,  from  which  Jesus  descended  to  the  triumphal  entry, 
21.  I,  on  which  he  uttered  his  great  prophecy,  24.  3,  and  to 
which  he  went  last  of  all  on  the  night  of  his  betrayal,  26.  30. 
Jesus  speaks  (9)  of  the  mountain  crowned  with  a  city, 
5.  14;  (10)  the  mountain  of  the  lost  sheep,  18.  12;  (11) 
the  mountains  of  refuge,  24.  16;  and  (12)  the  mountain  re- 
moved by  prayer,  17.  20;  21.  21. 

There  is  something  of  mountain  grandeur  in  this  Gospel, 
much  of  the  freshness  of  atmosphere  and  the  clearness  of 
vision  which  is  characteristic  of  the  mountain  height.  Jesus 
loved  the  mountains,  and  it  would  seem  that  Matthew  did 
too.  He  has  more  to  say  of  the  mountains  in  this  Gospel 
than  can  be  found  in  any  of  the  other  three.  We  call  it  the 
Gospel  of  the  Great  Mountains  in  the  ministry  of  Jesus. 

IV.  The  Man  and  the  Book 

The  characteristics  of  the  book  are  clearly  before  us  now. 
Do  they  not  correspond  most  closely  with  the  character  of 
the  man?  The  Gospel  according  to  Matthew  is  just  such 
a  Gospel  as  Matthew  would  have  been  most  likely  to  write. 
He  was  a  Jew  who  never  had  lost  his  sense  of  relationship 
to  his  own  people,  and  whose  primary  interest  was  in  prov- 
ing to  his  fellow  countrymen  that  Jesus  his  Master  was  their 
Messiah,  the  expected  King  whose  royal  authority  had  in- 
augurated the  kingdom  prophesied  in  the  Old  Testament, 
a  kingdom  of  this  earth,  but  a  kingdom  of  the  heavens  too. 


84       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

He  had  been  a  social  outcast  and  had  gained  a  sympathy 
for  all  beyond  the  Jewish  pale,  such  as  a  Jew  who  never 
had  been  under  the  social  ban  and  never  had  companied 
with  Jesus  would  not  be  likely  to  have.  The  bitterness  of 
spirit  inevitable  to  such  a  social  ostracism  as  he  had  ex- 
perienced is  apparent  in  his  ever-recurrent  pessimism  and 
gloom.  The  hand  of  the  publican  is  manifest  in  many  minor 
particulars  and  in  the  general  love  of  order  and  of  system- 
atic arrangement  which  has  its  parallel  in  the  love  of  right- 
eousness in  everything  and  in  every  one  and  in  the  peculiar 
disposition  toward  discipline  and  ecclesiastical  recognition, 
so  characteristic  of  both  the  Gospel  and  the  man.  There  is 
scarcely  a  feature  of  the  book  which  does  not  correspond 
with  some  feature  of  Matthew's  peculiar  personality. 

All  of  the  gospel  writers  have  the  same  story  to  tell,  yet 
how  differently  they  tell  it!  The  reason  for  the  difference 
between  their  narratives  is  to  be  found,  not  in  the  subject 
whom  they  portray,  nor  in  the  inspiration  which  they  re- 
ceived from  him  and  his  words  and  his  life,  but  in  them- 
selves. It  is  the  same  white  light  refracted  through  many 
prisms.  It  is  the  same  white  life  reflected  through  several 
minds.  Each  writer  has  his  individual  idiosyncrasies.  Each 
man  has  his  personal  preferences  and  prejudices.  Each  man 
has  his  particular  impressions  and  his  peculiar  experiences 
and  all  of  these  things  influence  his  thought  and  his  writing. 

The  two  great  facts  about  Matthew  were  that  he  had  been 
a  publican  and  that  he  was  an  apostle.  What  sort  of  a  Gos- 
pel would  an  apostle  who  had  been  a  publican  write?  Just 
such  a  Gospel  as  this.  Therefore  our  study  of  the  character- 
istics of  the  book  leads  us  all  the  more  readily  to  agree  with 
the  unanimous  tradition  of  the  ancient  church  as  it  was  ex- 
pressed by  that  greatest  scholar  of  the  first  Christian  cen- 
turies and  the  best  authority  among  them  upon  all  matters 
pertaining  to  critical  investigation  and  purity  of  the  faith. 
With  Origen  we  say,  "I  have  learned  from  tradition  that 
the  first  Gospel  was  written  by  Matthew,  who  was  once  a 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        85 


publican,  but  afterward  an  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,"  i^^ 
and  to  this  we  add  that  the  more  we  study  the  book  the  more 
we  feel  acquainted  with  the  man  and  the  more  certain  we 
are  that,  however  much  the  book  may  have  been  edited  in 
later  days,  it  still  bears  plainly  impressed  upon  it  the  person- 
ality of  the  publican  apostle.  As  H.  H.  B.  Ayles  has  said, 
"The  early  and  unanimous  tradition  of  the  church  assigns 
the  first  Gospel  to  Matthew,  and  there  is  no  explanation  of 
this  tradition  except  that  it  expresses  the  actual  fact."  ^^^ 

This  may  be  a  good  place  to  note  the  fact  that  the  same 
authorities  who  tell  us  that  Matthew  was  responsible  for 
this  Gospel  say  also  that  he  wrote  it  in  Hebrew.  For  ex- 
ample, Origen,  from  whom  we  have  just  quoted,  continues 
his  report  of  the  tradition  in  his  day  to  the  effect  that  the 
first  Gospel  "was  prepared  for  the  converts  from  Judaism, 
and  published  in  the  Hebrew  language."  200  j^js  tradition 
of  an  original  Hebrew  edition  of  the  Gospel  goes  back  to 
Papias,  who  is  quoted  by  Eusebius  as  saying,  "Matthew 
wrote  the  oracles  in  the  Hebrew  language,  and  every  one 
interpreted  them  as  he  was  able."  201  Irenaeus  makes  the 
same  assertion  concerning  the  original  Hebrew,202  and  his 
statement  is  confirmed  by  Pantaenus,203  Origen,^^* 
Jerome,205  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,2o«  Epiphanius,207  and  Au- 
gustine.208 

"'Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccles.,  VI,  25. 
Fathers,  Second  Series,  vol.  i,  p.  273. 

"•  Interpreter,  vol.  xii,  p.  273. 

'^  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccles.,  VI,  25. 
Fathers,  Second  Series,  vol.  i,  p.  273. 

"'Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccles,  III,  39. 
Fathers,  Second  Series,  i,  p.  173. 

"^  Adv.  Haer.,  Ill,  I.    Eusebius,  V,  8. 

*"  Eusebius,  op.  cit.,  V,  10.  3. 

**  Eusebius,  op.  cit.,  VI,  25. 

*"  Jerome,  De  vir.  ill.,  3,  36. 

**•  Catechet.,  14. 

"'  Haer.,  xxx,  3. 

**  Consensus  evangelistorum,  I,  2.  4. 


Nicene    and    Post-Nicene 


Nicene    and    Post-Nicene 


Nicene    and    Post-Nicene 


86       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Most  modern  scholars  agree  that  this  testimony  cannot 
be  set  aside,  and  that  we  must  conclude  that  Matthew  wrote 
the  Logia  at  least,  and  possibly  a  complete  Gospel  nar- 
rative in  the  Aramaic  or  the  Hebrew.  They  also  agree  that 
the  "Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews"  of  which  we  have 
only  a  few  fragments  in  Latin  and  Greek  cannot  be  proved 
to  have  any  connection  with  our  first  Gospel,  and  it  is 
doubtful  if  Matthew  the  Apostle  had  anything  to  do  with 
that  work.  There  is  also  a  general  agreement  that  our 
canonical  Matthew  is  not  a  translation  from  the  Hebrew, 
but  was  written  originally  in  Greek.  This  is  the  conclu- 
sion of  Alford,  Allen,  Beza,  Bleek,  Calvin,  Credner,  David- 
son, Delitzsch,  Dods,  EUicott,  Erasmus,  Ewald,  Fritzsche, 
Hilgenfeld,  Holtzmann,  Hug,  Jiilicher,  Keil,  Keim,  Kostlin, 
McGiffert,  Morison,  Lightfoot,  Lardner,  Paulus,  Reuss, 
Ritschl,  Roberts,  Salmon,  Schott,  Stuart,  Tischendorf, 
Thomson,  Weiss,  Wilke,  Wetstein,  De  Wette,  Zahn. 

Since  all  ancient  tradition  is  unanimous  in  ascribing  our 
first  Gospel  to  Matthew  and  in  saying  that  he  wrote  the 
Gospel  originally  in  Hebrew,  it  follows  that  an  original 
Hebrew  Gospel  written  by  Matthew  is  now  lost,  and  that 
at  some  later  date  he  must  have  written  the  Gospel  again 
in  Greek.  This  Greek  Gospel  was  not  a  translation  from 
the  Hebrew,  but  it  may  have  paralleled  the  other  very  closely 
and  it  must  have  superseded  it  entirely  after  a  tlme.^o^ 
The  tradition  of  the  Matthean  authorship  would  not  have  at- 
tached itself  to  this  Greek  Gospel  without  good  reason. 
The  most  simple  and  sufficient  reason  would  be  that  he 
himself  was  known  to  have  been  concerned  in  its  composi- 
tion. We  think  that  we  are  in  a  position  now  to  appeal  with 
all  confidence  to  the  internal  evidence  furnished  by  the  book 
itself  in  support  of  the  external  tradition. 

The  characteristics  of  the  book  are  the  characteristics  of 
the  man.     We  scarcely  could  conceive  of  a  book  which 

*"  So,  Bengel,  Benson,  Bloomfield,  Home,  Lee,  Ellicott,  Guericke, 
Olshausen,  Thiersch,  and  Schaff. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        87 

would  answer  more  perfectly  to  all  which  we  know  of 
Matthew  the  man.  Therefore,  when  we  find  the  best 
modern  criticism  agreeing  upon  the  "strong  individuality" 
in  this  book  and  the  "clear  purpose"  running  through  it,  the 
"uniform  character"  of  its  compositional*)  and  the  "con- 
sistency of  its  representation,"  we  conclude  that  it  cannot 
be  a  mere  compilation  from  many  and  various  sources,  but 
that  one  personality  has  impressed  itself  upon  the  whole 
work,  and  our  study  has  made  it  clear  that  no  other  person- 
ality would  meet  all  the  requirements  of  the  case  as  well  as 
that  of  ^latthew,  to  whom  all  the  early  tradition  in  the 
church  uniformly  ascribed  it. 

We  are  ready,  then,  to  agree  with  one  of  the  most  recent 
writers  upon  the  subject  of  Gospel  Origins  when  he  makes 
the  general  statements  that  "from  the  time  when  the  Gos- 
pels began  to  circulate  or  to  be  appealed  to,  it  was  the 
common  tradition  of  the  Christian  Church  that  they  were 
written  by  those  whose  names  they  bear,"  and  "this  tradi- 
tion rested  upon  no  claim  made  within  the  books  them- 
selves, and  the  only  possible  explanation  of  it  is  that  the 
tradition  rested  upon  facts  so  clearly  within  the  cognizance 
of  the  Christian  Church  that  denial  of  the  received  author- 
ship was  held  to  be  impossible."  211  We  may  conclude 
with  this  author  that  this  tradition  does  not  solve  any  or 
all  of  the  details  of  the  Synoptic  Problem  for  us;  and 
while  we  postpone  the  discussion  of  these  for  the  present, 
we  hold  fast  to  the  fundamental  truth  that  in  the  case  of 
each  Gospel  we  have  one  name,  and  only  one  name,  attached 
as  author,  and  that  in  the  case  of  the  first  Gospel  the  name 
of  the  author  and  the  character  of  the  man  correspond  with 


""  Reville :  "These  favorite  constructions  entwine  the  whole  book 
in  a  net  evidently  stretched  by  one  and  the  same  hand."  Credner, 
to  like  effect:  "These  peculiar  modes  of  expression,  which  uniformly 
recur  in  the  whole  course  of  the  writing,  show  the  unity  of  th^ 
author." 

*"  Holdsworth,  Gospel  Origins,  p.  23. 


88       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

the  characteristics  of  the  book  with  an  astonishing^  exactness 
and  perfection. 

V.  Peculiar  Portions 

We  notice  at  this  point  some  of  the  sections  in  this  Gospel 
which  are  not  paralleled  in  any  of  the  other  Gospel  records. 

1.  The  four  events  of  the  infancy  history  given  in  the 
second  chapter:  the  visit  of  the  Wise  Men,  the  slaughter 
of  the  innocents,  the  flight  into  Egypt,  and  the  return  to 
Nazareth. 

2.  Matthew  records  thirty-three  miracles,  and  three  of 
them  are  found  in  the  first  Gospel  alone :  the  healing  of  the 
two  blind  men,  chapter  nine;  Peter  walking  on  the  water, 
chapter  fourteen;  and  the  coin  in  the  fish's  mouth,  if  there 
is  any  miracle  implied  in  this  narrative,  chapter  seventeen. 

3.  There  are  fifteen  parables  in  this  Gospel,  and  ten  of 
them  are  not  found  elsewhere:  the  tares,  the  hid  treasure, 
the  pearl  of  great  price,  and  the  dragnet,  chapter  thirteen; 
the  unmerciful  servant,  chapter  eighteen ;  the  laborers  in  the 
vineyard,  chapter  twenty ;  the  two  sons,  chapter  twenty-one ; 
the  marriage  of  the  king's  son,  chapter  twenty-two;  the  ten 
virgins  and  the  talents,  chapter  twenty-five. 

4.  There  are  at  least  seven  important  incidents  connected 
with  the  Passion  and  resurrection  week  which  Matthew 
alone  has  recorded:  the  bargain  of  Judas,  chapter  twenty- 
six;  the  suicide  of  Judas,  the  dream  of  Pilate's  wife,  the 
resurrection  of  the  departed  saints,  and  the  watch  set  at  the 
sepulcher,  chapter  twenty-seven;  the  Sanhedrin  explana- 
tion of  the  open  tomb,  and  the  earthquake  on  the  resurrec- 
tion morning,  chapter  twenty-eight. 

We  have  noticed  the  greater  and  smaller  discourses 
recorded  by  Matthew  alone,  and  we  have  seen  that  the 
phrases,  "it  is  fulfilled,"  "in  order  that  it  may  be  fulfilled," 
"in  order  that  the  thing  spoken  may  be  fulfilled"  are  char- 
acteristic of  Matthew's  use,  as  is  the  phrase,  "the  kingdom 
of  the  heavens"  and  the  word  "church."    "The  kingdom  of 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        89 

the  heavens"  is  not  found  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament. 
"The  church"  occurs  one  hundred  and  eleven  times  in  the 
epistles  and  the  book  of  Acts,  but  it  is  not  found  in  any 
other  Gospel.  These  characteristic  phrases  are  not  found 
in  any  one  portion  of  the  book,  but  are  scattered  throughout, 
and  they  bear  their  witness  to  the  literary  unity  of  the 
composition.  One  hand  has  gone  carefully  over  the  whole 
and  made  it  a  single  articulated  work ;  and  it  does  not  seem 
so  Hkely  that  these  phrases  would  be  foisted  into  the  nar- 
rative by  an  editor  as  that  they  would  belong  to  the  original 
text  furnished  by  the  author. 

VI.  The  Aim  of  the  Gospel 

John  David  Michaelis  said,  "He  who  does  not  know  ex- 
actly the  aim  that  each  apostle  set  before  him  in  writing  his 
Gospel  or  his  letter  will  never  understand  that  writing 
completely."  We  are  ready  now  to  ask  what  aim  Matthew 
set  before  him  in  the  composition  of  his  book.  Some  critics 
have  found  the  first  Gospel  a  book  of  strange  contradictions 
and  have  been  unable  to  believe  in  its  unity  of  authorship 
or  singleness  of  aim.  Others,  like  Bernhard  Weiss  and 
Ernest  Burton  and  Frederic  Godet,  have  no  difficulty  in 
discerning  the  purpose  of  the  book. 

Matthew  writes  for  the  Jews,  and  he  shows  them  clearly 
that  Jesus  was  the  Messias  promised  in  their  own  Scriptures, 
but,  unrecognized  and  rejected  and  crucified  by  themselves, 
he,  the  Jewish  Messias,  had  become  the  head  of  a  church 
partly  Jewish  but  largely  Gentile  and  destined  to  include  all 
the  races  of  men.  The  disciples  of  Jesus  represented  the 
true  Israel,  whether  they  were  Gentiles  or  Jews.  All  Jews 
who  were  not  Christians  were  no  longer  members  of  the 
church  of  God. 

Matthew's  book,  therefore,  was  more  than  a  history.  It 
was  an  attack  upon  all  the  existing  Jewish  ecclesiasticism. 
Matthew  said  to  all  the  religious  authorities  of  his  day  and 
to  all  unbelieving  Jews:   "You   have  crucified  your  own 


90       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Messias.  We  welcomed  him  and  are  true  to  him  still.  You 
are  the  deserters ;  we  have  stood  by  the  truth.  All  the  Old 
Testament  prophecies  were  fulfilled  in  him,  not  simply  single 
prophecies,  but  all  of  them.  However,  they  were  fulfilled 
contrary  to  expectation.  Jesus  came  from  Galilee,  not 
from  Judaea.  He  Hved  in  Nazareth  and  not  in  Bethlehem. 
He  was  a  humble  Teacher  and  not  a  conquering  King.  He 
was  the  Suffering  Servant  of  Jehovah  and  not  the  Majestic 
Monarch  of  your  dreams.  The  reason  for  this  lies  in  your 
own  guilt.  Jesus  was  born  at  Bethlehem,  and  he  was  driven 
to  Nazareth  by  the  guilty,  murderous  plot  of  your  own 
king.  You  yourselves  made  him  a  Galilsean;  and  in  that 
way  seemingly  contradictory  prophecies  are  fulfilled  in  him, 
as  'Out  of  Bethlehem  shall  he  be  called,'  212  and  'He  will  be 
a  light  in  the  borderland  of  Galilee.' 213  Hear,  O  Israel; 
believe,  and  be  saved.  You  have  rejected  the  Messias 
Here  are  the  facts  which  prove  that  true.  Repent,  therefore, 
and  accept  him,  or  take  the  consequences  upon  your  own 
heads.  You  will  be  rejected  by  him  in  his  turn  and  your 
kingdom  will  pass  into  other  hands." 

The  first  Gospel  had  something  of  the  character  of  an 
official  ultimatum.  It  was  a  last  call  of  Jehovah  to  his 
people :  "This  is  my  beloved  Son ;  hear  him  and  obey  him, 
or  perish  in  the  swift  judgment  coming  upon  your  city  and 
race."  This  book  then  is  half  law  and  half  gospel.  It  closes 
the  Old  Testament  as  it  opens  the  New.  It  bridges  the 
chasm  between  the  old  and  the  new  dispensations.  It  shows 
that  the  memories  and  the  hopes  of  God's  people  are  to 
find  their  consummation  in  one  man,  the  Lord  of  the  Chris- 
tians and  the  Messias  of  the  Jews. 

The  first  Gospel  was  not  the  first  book  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment to  be  written.  It  probably  was  not  the  first  of  the 
Gospels  to  be  written,  yet  it  stands  appropriately  first  in  our 
New  Testament  canon.    Matthew  shows  that  God's  eternal 

-''  Matt.  2.  6. 
''"Matt.  4.  15,  16. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        91 

purpose  has  not  been  thwarted  but  consummated  in  the 
life  and  death  of  Jesus.  Christianity  is  the  fulfillment  of 
the  Old  Testament  faith.  The  words  of  Jesus  in  the  great 
sermon,  "I  came  not  to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil,"  ^i*  might  have 
been  written  on  the  title-page  as  the  motto  of  the  book. 

Its  aim  is  both  apologetic  and  polemic.  It  defends  the 
Christian  position.  It  defies  the  Jewish  anti-Christian  cam- 
paign. It  appeals  to  the  Christians  to  be  loyal  to  Jesus  even 
though  it  may  seem  disloyalty  to  their  own  people  to  be  so. 
In  the  overwhelming  calamities  which  were  coming  upon 
the  Jews  they  must  choose  between  loyalty  to  their  race  and 
loyalty  to  him.  The  race  was  doomed:  salvation  could  be 
found  only  in  the  resurrected  Lord. 

VII.  The  Gospel's  Affinities  Among  the  New 
Testament  Books 

The  spirit  and  purpose  of  the  Gospel  according  to  Mat- 
thew ally  it  most  closely  with  those  New  Testament  books 
which  were  written  for  Jewish  Christians  or  represented 
the  tone  and  attitude  of  the  Jewish  Christian  Church. 

I.  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  has  much  the  same  general 
aim.  It  endeavors  to  prove  to  the  Christians  among  the 
Hebrews  that  in  spite  of  all  appearances  and  all  disappoint- 
ments they  had  the  better  of  their  unbelieving  countrymen, 
and,  if  the  worst  came  to  the  worst,  they  would  be  justified 
in  going  out  of  the  camp  with  Jesus  their  Lord.  Paul 
thought  good  Christians  might  be  good  Jews  as  well.  Mat- 
thew and  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  saw 
clearly  that  the  time  was  near  at  hand  when  a  choice  must 
be  made  and  the  loyal  Christian  would  find  it  necessary  to 
break  with  the  peculiar  rites  and  the  temple  worship  of  his 
race.  Both  books  are  apologetical  and  polemical.  They  per- 
suade the  Jews  to  be  Christians  by  proving  that  Christian 
Jews  have  infinitely  the  better  of  the  bargain,  for  they  alone 

*"  Matt.  5.  17. 


92       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

have  the  fulfillment  of  the  nation's  hope  and  the  assurance 
of  salvation  in  the  nation's  Messiah. 

2.  The  Epistle  of  James  is  probably  the  most  Jewish  of 
the  New  Testament  Epistles.  It  makes  no  mention  of  the 
incarnation  or  redemption  or  the  resurrection  and  ascen- 
sion. It  has  so  few  distinctively  Christian  elements  in  it 
that  one  modern  critic  has  decided  that  it  is  a  purely  Jewish 
writing  which  has  crept  in  among  the  Christian  books.  The 
word  "gospel"  does  not  occur  in  this  Jewish  epistle ;  but  we 
are  not  surprised  to  find  that  it  has  many  points  of  contact 
with  the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew,  the  Jewish  Gospel. 
There  are  at  least  ten  passages  which  parallel  the  teachings 
of  Jesus  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  Nowhere  else  in 
the  New  Testament  can  we  find  so  many  allusions  to  this 
sermon  in  the  same  limited  space.  The  whole  epistle 
breathes  the  spirit  of  the  teachings  of  Jesus,  as  recorded  by 
Matthew.  There  are  the  same  ethical  standards.  There  is 
the  same  sternness  of  rebuke  for  wrongdoers.  There  is  the 
same  sympathy  for  the  wronged.  We  conclude  that  Mat- 
thew must  have  given  us  a  true  picture  of  Jesus  when  we 
find  that  James,  his  brother,  thinks  and  speaks  so  much 
like  him.  The  affinities  between  these  two  books  help  to 
substantiate  the  claims  of  each  to  authenticity. 

3.  There  is  one  other  book  in  the  New  Testament  which 
seems  akin  to  the  first  Gospel  in  its  Jewish  undertone  and 
general  spirit.  That  is  the  closing  book  of  the  canon,  the 
Apocalypse  of  John.  In  the  Encyclopaedia  Britannica 
Edwin  Abbott  says  of  the  first  Gospel  that  it  "lays  special 
stress  upon  the  sin  of  religious  ostentation  and  hypocrisy," 
and  he  further  characterizes  it  by  saying,  "Matthew,  more 
than  the  rest  of  the  evangelists,  seems  to  move  in  evil  days, 
and  amid  a  race  of  backsliders,  among  dogs  and  swine  who 
are  unworthy  of  the  pearls  of  truth,  among  the  tares  sown 
by  the  enemy,  among  fishermen  who  have  to  cast  back  many 
of  the  fish  caught  in  the  net  of  the  gospel;  the  broad  way 
is  ever  in  his  mind,  and  the  multitude  of  those  that  go 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        93 

thereby,  and  the  guest  without  the  wedding  garment,  and 
the  foolish  virgins,  and  the  goats  as  well  as  the  sheep,  and 
those  who  even  cast  out  devils  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  and 
yet  are  rejected  by  him  because  they  work  lawlessness."  ^is 
We  are  reminded  of  the  synagogue  of  Satan  in  the 
Apocalypse,  composed  of  those  who  say  they  are  Jews,  and 
they  are  not,  but  do  lie.^^®  We  are  reminded  of  the  Lao- 
diceans  who  said  they  were  rich  and  had  need  of  nothing, 
when  they  were  wretched  and  miserable  and  poor  and  blind 
and  naked.2i^  We  remember  that  the  whole  Apocalypse  is 
filled  with  wars  and  plagues  and  thunders  and  the  vengeance 
of  God  upon  all  his  adversaries.  We  find  that  the  woes  of 
the  twenty-third  chapter  of  Matthew  have  their  apocalyptic 
counterpart  in  the  woes  of  the  ninth,  eleventh,  and  eigh- 
teenth chapters  of  this  book.  We  find  that  the  Apocalypse 
is  built  upon  Old  Testament  allusions  and  phraseology, 
and  is  saturated  with  the  Old  Testament  spirit  to  a  fuller 
extent  than  any  other  book  in  the  New,  and  we  remember 
that  Matthew  makes  the  first  Gospel  a  Gospel  of  the  ful- 
fillment of  Old  Testament  promises  and  prophecies;  and  we 
see  in  this  constant  reference  to  the  Old  Testament  another 
link  of  resemblance  between  the  two.  These  four  books — 
the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew,  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews, the  Epistle  of  James,  the  Apocalypse  of  John — are 
Jewish-Christian  books,  with  a  fuller  emphasis  upon  the 
Jewish  side  of  the  equation  than  is  to  be  found  in  any  of 
the  other  New  Testament  books.  From  this  point  of  view 
they  form  a  class  by  themselves.  As  the  Gospel  for  the 
Jews  the  first  Gospel  has  closest  affinities  with  this  group  of 
New  Testament  books. 

VIIL  Outline  of  the  Gospel 
Professor  Moorehead  suggests  a  simple  outline,    "i.  The 


'  Ninth  edition,  vol.  x,  p.  715. 
'Rev.  3.  9. 
Rev.  3.  17. 


94       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

King's  birth,  chapters  1-2.  2.  The  Kingdom  proclaimed, 
chapters  3-7.  3.  The  King's  ways  and  works,  chapters 
8-12.     4.  The  mysteries  of  the  Kingdom,  chapters  13-20. 

5.  The  King  rejected,  chapters  21-23.  6.  The  coming  and 
judgment  of  the  King,  chapters  24-25.  7.  Salvation 
through  the  death  and  resurrection  of  the  King,  chapters 
26-28."  218 

From  the  lectures  of  Bernhard  Weiss  in  Berlin  we  re- 
produce this  more  elaborate  outline:  i.  The  Son  of  David  is 
born  in  Bethlehem  and  through  the  guilt  of  Israel  is  driven 
to  Nazareth,  chapters  1-2.  2.  Jesus  through  the  guilt  of 
Israel  is  made  the  servant  of  the  heathen,  3.  i  to  4.  12. 
3.  Jesus  proves  himself  a  prophet  in  Israel,  mighty  in 
word  and  in  deed,  4.  13  to  9.  35.  4.  Jesus  through  his  dis- 
ciples provides  for  Israel,  9.  36  to  13.  53.  5.  Jesus  de- 
votes himself  to  the  instruction  of  his  disciples,  as  the  be- 
ginners and  founders  of  the  future  church,  13.  54  to  20.  16. 

6.  Jesus  stands  before  death  with  freedom  and  conscious- 
ness, ready  to  seal  his  Messiahship,  20.  17  to  25.  46.  7. 
Jesus  put  to  death.  He  becomes  King  of  his  church  which 
shall  be  gathered  out  of  all  peoples,  while  Israel  through  its 
own  guilt  is  rejected,  26.  i  to  28.  20. 

As  President  Weston  has  suggested,  "The  first  book  of 
the  Old  Testament  records  the  calhng  out  of  a  nation  from 
which  the  Messiah  should  come;  this  first  book  of  the  New 
Testament  records  the  calling  out  of  a  nation  in  which  the 
Messiah  shall  dwell."  ^i^  The  story  climaxes  toward  the 
close.  The  last  chapters  rise  into  epic  grandeur.  Robert 
Louis  Stevenson  said  of  them,  "I  believe  that  they  will  move 
and  startle  anyone,  who  will  read  them  freshly  hke  any 
other  book."  They  have  moved  multitudes  as  no  other 
chapters  in  the  New  Testament  have.  Tears  have  filled  the 
eyes  of  those  who  read  this  matchless  narrative  of  the  clos- 
ing scenes  in  the  greatest  of  this  world's  tragedies.    Matthew 

"*  Studies  in  the  Four  Gospels,  pp.  78,  79. 

"'Matthew,  the  Genesis  of  the  New  Testament,  p.  34. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MATTHEW        95 

is  usually  as  self -restrained  as  any  bookkeeper  or  any  mere 
annalist,  but  at  the  close  of  this  Gospel  he  astonishes  us 
with  his  pathos  and  his  power. 

IX.  Time  and  Place  of  Writing 

Eusebius  tells  us  that  "of  all  the  disciples  of  the  Lord, 
only  Matthew  and  John  have  left  us  written  memorials,  and 
they,  tradition  says,  were  led  to  write  only  under  the  pres- 
sure of  necessity.  For  Matthew,  who  had  at  the  first 
preached  to  the  Hebrews,  when  he  was  about  to  go  to  other 
peoples,  committed  his  Gospel  to  writing  .  .  .  ,  and  thus 
compensated  those  whom  he  was  obliged  to  leave  for  the 
loss  of  his  presence."  220  The  Gospel  speaks  of  "the  holy 
city"  and  "the  holy  place,"  as  if  they  were  still  in  existence. 
Therefore  both  the  church  tradition  and  the  internal  evi- 
dence lead  us  to  think  that  the  book  must  have  been  written 
before  the  fall  of  Jerusalem.  Keim  says,  "The  book  was 
written  about  the  year  A.  D.  66."  221  Hug,  Bleek,  Ayles, 
Allen,  Meyer,  Holtzmann,  Godet,  Keim,  Keil,  Olshausen, 
Ebrard,  Lange,  and  others  approximately  agree. 

At  Jerusalem  or  in  some  city  of  Palestine  Matthew  prob- 
ably wrote  the  most  of  the  record  of  the  life  of  his  Lord  be- 
fore he  began  his  foreign  missionary  labors.  The  actual 
publication  may  have  been  elsewhere.  Weiss  suggests 
Ephesus  or  Asia  Minor.222  Wright  thinks  that  Alexandria 
or  Egypt223  satisfies  the  conditions.  Allen  prefers  Antioch 
or  Syria. 224  Sanday  suggests  Damascus  or  Antioch. 225  We 
have  no  data  upon  which  to  found  any  sure  conclusion  at 
this  point. 

Eusebius  tells  us  that  the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew 

"» III,  24.  6. 

"*  Introduction,  II,  p.  287. 

"*  Interpreter,  vol.  ii,  p.  247. 

"*  Expository  Times,  vol.  xxii,  p.  350. 

""Oxford  Studies  in  the  Synoptic  Problem,  p.  24. 


96       THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

was  carried  into  the  foreign  missionary  field  in  the  days  of 
the  apostles.  Bartholomew  took  it  to  India,  and  Pantaenus 
found  it  there  in  later  days,  preserved  among  them  with 
pious  care.226  Since  the  time  of  Pantaenus  it  has  gone  about 
the  world.  It  has  been  a  blessing  to  all  the  nations.  The 
name  of  Matthew  has  been  cherished  wherever  the  gospel 
of  Christ  has  been  preached.  He  wrote  for  the  Jews,  but 
the  Gospel  has  been  claimed  by  the  Gentile  races  as  well. 
The  world  has  appreciated  it.  All  time  has  added  to  its 
laurels.  The  publican  who  wrote  it  stands  among  the  im- 
mortals. The  power  and  the  presence  of  his  Master  was 
with  him  in  his  writing  and  has  been  with  his  book  through 
all  the  days. 

Renan  and  Jiilicher  would  seem  to  have  been  justified 
when  they  said  it  was  the  most  important  book  of  Christen- 
dom, and  that  it  has  exerted  its  enormous  influence  upon 
the  church  because  it  was  written  by  a  man  who  bore 
within  himself  the  spirit  of  the  growing  Church  Universal 
and  who  knew  how  to  write  a  Gospel  destined  and  fitted 
for  all  manner  of  believers. 

"^  V,  10.  3. 


PART  II 

THE  MOST  AUTHENTIC  GOSPEL:  THE  GOSPEL 
ACCORDING  TO  MARK 


PART  II 

THE  MOST  AUTHENTIC  GOSPEL:  THE  GOSPEL 
ACCORDING  TO  MARK 

I.  The  Author 

The  second  Gospel  always  has  been  called  the  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  Mark.  The  "Mark"  who  was  its  author  usually 
has  been  identified  in  church  tradition  with  the  "John 
Mark"  mentioned  in  Acts  12.  12.^  There  we  read  that 
Peter  when  released  from  prison  went  to  the  house  of  Mary 
the  mother  of  John  whose  surname  was  Mark.  Accepting 
this  identification  as  an  authentic  one,  we  notice  first  this 
rather  unusual  name. 

I.  His  Name.  Paul  tells  us  that  this  man  was  a  Jew.* 
Therefore  his  original  name  would  be  the  Hebrew  name 
"John."  That  name  meant,  "Jehovah  is  gracious."  It  also 
was  the  name  of  the  author  of  the  fourth  Gospel.  The 
second  Gospel  and  the  fourth  Gospel  were  both  written 
by  "John."  The  first  of  the  Gospels  to  be  written  and  the 
last  of  the  Gospels  to  be  written  bore  this  proclamation  upon 
their  forefront,  "Jehovah  is  gracious."  In  the  superscrip- 
tion of  the  author's  name,  if  they  had  it,  each  declared  that 
the  gospel  which  followed  would  be  a  gospel  of  grace. 
The  name  of  the  author  of  the  first  Gospel  had  a  like  import. 
Matthew  means,  "the  gift  of  Jehovah,  Jehovah's  gracious 
gift."  The  third  Gospel  has  been  distinguished  from  the 
others  as  the  Gospel  of  Grace.    It  is  full  of  words  of  grace 

'  This  identification  has  been  disputed  by  Grotius,  Calovius,  Cave, 
Tillemont  and  others ;  but  modern  scholarship  is  practically  agreed 
upon  it. 

'Col.  4.  10,  II. 

99 


100     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

and  deeds  of  grace.  The  four  Gospels  have  this  character- 
istic in  common,  that  they  set  forth  the  grace  of  our  God 
to  all  men.  The  names  of  the  authors  of  three  of  them  sug- 
gest this  fact,  and  the  character  of  the  other  evangelist 
exemplified  it.  Could  this  have  had  anything  to  do  with 
their  choice  for  this  work  ? 

When  this  second  evangelist  was  born,  his  mother  was 
grateful  and  said,  "Jehovah  is  gracious  to  have  given  me 
a  son.  I  will  call  his  name  John."  Later,  for  some  reason 
unknown,  "John"  had  a  surname  added  and  was  called 
"John  Mark."  This  name  "Mark"  was  a  Roman  name,  a 
Gentile  name.  It  was  the  Latin  name  "Marcus,"  mean- 
ing "a  heavy  hammer."  There  is  some  reason  for  thinking 
that  Mark  had  some  stump  fingers,  as  we  shall  see  later  on. 
May  it  not  be  possible  that  he  had  met  with  some  accident 
in  his  young  manhood,  in  which  a  heavy  hammer  had  fallen 
upon  the  fingers  of  his  left  hand  and  crushed  the  ends  of 
two  or  more  of  them,  and  that  the  presence  of  that  deform- 
ity and  the  memory  of  its  cause  was  responsible  for  this 
surname?  We  do  not  know  that  the  suggestion  has  been 
made  by  any  one  before,  but  in  lack  of  any  other  certain 
explanation  of  this  surname  we  may  be  content  to  let  it 
stand. 

Through  all  his  later  life  this  man  answered  to  either 
name,  "John"  or  "Mark,"  or  to  the  double  name,  "John 
Mark."  John  was  his  name  in  early  life.  Mark  seems  to 
have  become  his  more  common  name  in  later  life.  At  times 
he  was  called  John  whose  surname  is  Mark  in  his  middle 
life.  All  these  names  appear  in  the  New  Testament.  John 
alone  is  found  in  two  passages  in  Acts.^  The  double  name, 
John  Mark,  occurs  three  times  in  the  Book  of  Acts.'*  The 
name  "Mark"  occurs  alone  five  times,  once  in  Acts,  three 
times  in  the  Pauline  Epistles,  and  once  in  First  Peter.' 

'Acts  13.  5,  13. 

*Acts  12.  12,  25;  15.  37. 

^  Acts  15.  39;  Col.  4.  10;  2  Tim.  4.  11 ;  Philem.  24;  i  Pet.  5.  13. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  loi 

These  passages  with  their  context  give  us  all  the  facts  con- 
cerning John  Mark's  life  contained  in  the  New  Testament. 
Before  turning  to  these,  however,  let  us  notice  that  John 
Mark's  name  is  half  Hebrew  and  half  Roman  and  marks  its 
bearer  as  the  man  best  fitted  to  introduce  the  gospel  of  the 
Hebrew  Messias  to  the  Roman  world.  The  second  Gospel 
is  the  gospel  written  by  a  Jew  for  the  Latin  race. 

2.  Facts  of  His  Life.  Mark's  mother  was  Mary,  one  of 
the  many  Marys  whose  names  stand  for  all  that  is  good  in 
the  New  Testament  narratives.  This  Mary  is  the  represen- 
tative of  open-handed  and  munificent  hospitality.  She 
probably  was  well-to-do.  She  had  a  home  in  Jerusalem,  a 
home  with  a  large  enclosed  porch  before  it,^  and  with  a 
large  assembly  room  inside  it.'^  This  room  was  thrown  open 
for  a  prayer  service,  and  many  were  gathered  together  in 
it.  There  may  have  been  many  servants  in  the  home.  We 
know  that  there  was  one  maid  whose  duty  it  was  to  attend 
upon  the  door.  This  home  seems  to  have  been  a  sort  of 
headquarters  for  the  leaders  of  the  Christian  Church  in 
Jerusalem.  Peter  went  directly  to  this  house  when  he  was 
released  from  prison,  and  the  maid  who  came  to  the  door 
and  heard  his  voice  recognized  it  instantly. 

Peter  evidently  was  well  known  to  all  the  inmates  of 
that  home,  and  it  may  have  been  his  home  when  he  was  in 
Jerusalem.  He  calls  Mark  his  "son"  ®  and  it  has  been 
thought  that  this  term  of  intimate  association  and  affection 
meant  that  Peter  was  responsible  for  Mark's  conversion. 
Mark  was  his  son  in  the  gospel,  we  are  told.  We  think 
it  just  as  probable  that  Peter  had  lived  in  the  home  in  Jeru- 
salem with  Mark  until  the  older  man  had  come  to  regard 
the  younger  man  with  all  the  intimate  affection  he  could 
have  given  to  a  son  of  his  own.  li  Mary  was  a  widow,  Peter 
may  have  been  the  responsible  head  of  the  household,  and 

•Acts  12.  13. 
'Acts  12.  12. 
'  I  Pet.  5.  13. 


102     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Mark  may  have  come  to  seem  to  him  as  his  son  in  that 
relationship. 

Mary  was  related  to  Barnabas,  a  man  of  generous 
heart  and  ample  means.  The  two  may  have  shared  the 
same  family  wealth,  and  they  seem  to  have  had  much  in 
common  in  their  personal  disposition.  When  Barnabas  and 
Saul  came  to  Jerusalem  together  they  probably  were  enter- 
tained in  Mary's  home,  for  it  was  a  hospitable  home  and 
Barnabas  was  a  relative ;  and  it  was  at  this  time  that  Mark 
left  this  home  and  went  to  Antioch  with  these  men.^  If  they 
had  been  entertained  in  his  home  it  would  have  been  easier 
for  him  to  go  away  with  the  two  guests  whom  his  mother 
had  so  honored  and  trusted  and  with  whom  he  had  thus 
become  so  well  acquainted.  Mark  accompanied  Barnabas 
and  Paul  on  their  first  missionary  journey. i*^  He  gave 
promise  of  very  valuable  assistance  to  them. 

In  his  home  he  had  been  thrown  into  constant  association 
with  Peter  and  the  other  disciples  of  Jesus,  and  for  ten  years 
there  his  mind  had  been  stored  with  rich  treasure  of  remi- 
niscence of  their  narratives  concerning  the  work  and  the 
words  of  the  Master.  Paul  was  wholly  lacking  at  this  point, 
and  Barnabas  probably  never  had  had  the  opportunities 
which  Mark  had  enjoyed.  Wherever  they  went  Mark  could 
be  their  surety  for  the  facts  upon  which  all  their  gospel 
preaching  was  based.  He  could  quote  the  testimony  of  eye- 
witnesses for  all  the  incidents  of  the  marvelous  history.  At 
first  they  were  not  disappointed  in  him;  but  at  Perga  in 
Pamphylia  Mark  determined,  for  some  reason  which  must 
have  seemed  sufficient  to  him  and  which  seemed  altogether 
insufficient  to  Paul,  that  it  was  high  time  for  him  to  break 
with  the  missionary  expedition  and  return  to  his  home  in 
Jerusalem.il 

Barnabas  and  Paul  went  on  alone.    After  the  first  mis- 

•Acts  12.  25. 
'"Acts  13.  s. 
"Acts  13.  13. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  103 

sionary  journey  they  came  back  to  Antioch,  and  after  they 
had  gone  down  to  Jerusalem  and  in  all  probability  had  been 
entertained  again  in  Mary's  hospitable  home,  they  made 
another  short  stay  in  Antioch ;  and  then  Paul  proposed  that 
they  go  again  upon  a  missionary  tour.  Barnabas  agreed, 
and  he  was  minded  to  take  with  them  John  Mark.  Two 
years  had  passed,  and  Mark  may  have  been  a  better  man  by 
this  time ;  but  Paul  was  unwilHng  to  risk  a  second  desertion 
on  his  part.  He  called  him  an  apostate,  and  declared  he 
would  have  nothing  more  to  do  with  such  a  man.  Barnabas 
defended  his  cousin  as  well  as  he  could.  The  discussion 
waxed  warm,  and  at  last  there  was  a  paroxysm  of  rage  on  the 
part  of  one  or  both  of  them,^^  ^nd  Paul  preferred  to  part 
company  with  Barnabas  rather  than  to  be  forced  to  keep 
company  with  Mark. 

Eleven  years  later  Paul  either  had  repented  his  deci- 
sion concerning  Mark  or  Mark  had  so  improved  in 
character  that  he  felt  warranted  in  restoring  him  to  his 
favor.  Paul  calls  him  a  "fellow  worker"  in  the  Epistle 
to  Philemon, 13  a^fj  [^  t^g  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  he  de- 
clares that  Mark  has  been  "a  comfort"  to  him.^^  Later  still 
he  tells  Timothy  that  Mark  is  "useful  to  him  for  minister- 
ing." 15  From  the  salutation  appended  to  Peter's  epistle  we 
learn  that  Mark  was  associated  with  Peter  at  the  time  his 
epistle  was  written. ^^ 

These  are  the  facts  recorded  in  the  New  Testament  con- 
cerning Mark.  We  have  his  mother's  name,  and  are  given 
some  glimpse  of  his  home  in  Jerusalem.  We  know  that  he 
became  associated  in  ministerial  and  missionary  work  with 
three  of  the  great  leaders  of  the  early  Christian  Church, 
namely,   Barnabas,    Peter,   and    Paul.     Barnabas   was   his 

"  iyivero  di  7rapo|i;<r/i6s,   Acts   1 5.  39. 
'•  Philem.  24. 
"Col.  4.  II. 
"2  Tim.  4.  II. 
"I  Pet.  5.  13. 


104     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

cousin,^'^  and  he  probably  was  kindly  disposed  toward  Mark 
for  that  reason.  Peter  may  have  sympathized  with  him  be- 
cause he  found  that  they  were  much  alike  in  personal  char- 
acter, so  much  so  that  they  might  have  been  father  and  son. 
Was  it  pure  fickleness  which  led  Mark  to  desert  Barnabas 
and  Paul  on  that  first  missionary  journey?  Paul  would 
not  have  forgiven  him  if  he  had  had  no  better  reason  for 
going  home  at  that  time  than  that  he  had  changed  his  mind. 
Peter  would  have  found  a  bond  of  sympathy  in  any  such 
incident.  He  had  changed  his  mind  so  often  himself  that  he 
could  easily  forgive  anyone  else  for  doing  it. 

Peter  was  more  willing  to  bear  with  weak  and  vacillat- 
ing brethren  than  Paul  was.  It  was  his  commission  to 
strengthen  the  brethren.!^  He  prayed  the  God  of  all  grace 
to  perfect,  establish,  strengthen,  and  settle  all  who  were  im- 
perfect and  needed  stability.^^  To  Paul's  mind  stability  was 
an  essential  to  respectability.  He  would  not  fellowship  with 
anyone  who  lacked  it.  When  Peter  changed  his  mind  there 
at  Antioch  and  Barnabas  was  carried  away  into  the  dissimu- 
lation, Paul  withstood  them  to  the  face.  He  declared  that 
they  were  traitors  to  the  truth  of  the  gospel,  and  he  would 
have  nothing  to  do  with  them  until  they  repented  and  had 
approved  themselves  again.^o  When  Mark  proved  apostate 
at  Perga  in  Pamphylia,  Paul  was  ready  to  cut  him  off  at 
once.  As  long  as  Mark  was  unrepentant  he  would  have 
nothing  more  to  do  with  him.  Mark  must  have  proved  him- 
self repentant  and  faithful  in  the  ministry  before  Paul  finally 
acknowledged  him  as  a  fellow  worker  and  found  him  a  com- 
fort and  useful  in  attendant  services. 

Mark  always  appears  in  notable  company  in  the  New 
Testament,  but  always  in  a  subordinate  position.  He  is 
attendant,  minister,  interpreter,  servant  all  the  time.     Each 


^'Col.  4-  lo. 
"  Luke  22.  32. 
"  I  Pet.  5.  10. 
^"Gal.  2.  11-18. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  105 

of  the  four  symbols  assigned  to  the  four  evangelists  has  been 
given  to  Mark  by  some  one  of  the  church  Fathers,  but  the 
one  most  appropriate  to  his  personal  character  and  to  the 
picture  given  of  him  in  the  New  Testament  is  that  of  the 
ox.  In  early  life  he  was  somewhat  immature,  but  in  later 
life  he  was  as  serviceable  as  an  ox.  Upon  the  basis  of  the 
facts  recorded  in  the  New  Testament  what  conception  shall 
we  form  of  the  character  of  this  man  Mark? 

3.  His  Character.  We  are  disposed  to  think  that  Mark 
was  the  spoiled  child  of  a  wealthy  widow.  His  mother 
lavished  all  her  affection  upon  him.  He  had  everything 
pretty  much  his  own  way  in  the  home.  He  was  reared  in 
comparative  luxury.  He  knew  little  or  nothing  of  hardship, 
and  he  was  not  disposed  to  court  any  acquaintance  with  it. 
It  was  almost  inevitable  that  he  should  be  lacking  in 
heroic  fiber.  When  his  mother  became  a  devoted  Christian, 
and  Barnabas  and  Saul  were  entertained  in  her  home,  the 
young  man  became  fired  with  enthusiasm  for  the  new  cause ; 
but  it  was  boyish  enthusiasm,  not  like  that  of  the  older 
men.  When  Barnabas  and  Saul  determined  to  go  upon  the 
first  missionary  journey  Mark  volunteered  at  once  to  accom- 
pany them.  It  was  a  romantic  undertaking  and  there  would 
be  great  adventure.  He  set  out  in  high  glee.  At  Perga  in 
Pamphylia  his  enthusiasm  had  subsided,  his  missionary  zeal 
had  disappeared,  his  whole  attitude  toward  the  enterprise 
had  changed,  and  he  left  Barnabas  and  Paul  to  go  on  with- 
out him  while  he  went  home  to  his  mother. 

At  least  four  considerations  may  have  had  a  share  in 
bringing  about  this  change  of  heart  on  the  part  of  Mark. 

(i)  It  may  have  been  the  first  time  that  Mark  had  been 
away  from  home.  He  had  not  realized  what  life  would  be 
without  a  fond  mother  close  at  hand.  Barnabas  was  kindly 
and  Paul  was  well  disposed,  but  neither  of  them  could  take 
the  place  of  a  mother,  Mark  got  increasingly  homesick  all 
the  time.  Those  who  have  had  bad  attacks  of  homesickness 
say  that  it  is  a  terrible  disease,  and  that  those  of  us  who 


io6     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

never  have  had  it  can  have  no  conception  of  the  miseries  its 
victims  endure.  It  was  awful  in  the  island  of  Cyprus,  but 
Mark  kept  hoping  that  they  would  soon  turn  back  home 
again.  On  they  went  the  whole  length  of  the  island,  and 
then,  to  Mark's  utter  dismay,  they  decided  to  set  sail  for  Asia 
Minor.  They  were  going  still  farther  from  home!  They 
surely  had  gone  far  enough ! 

Mark  may  have  been  seasick  on  the  way  over.  Anyway 
when  they  arrived  at  Perga  he  was  so  wretched  that  he  had 
visions  of  a  serious  illness  there  in  a  strange  land  and  of  a 
lonely  death  before  his  mother  would  get  the  news  of  his 
condition  and  hasten  to  the  bedside  of  her  only  son.  There 
was  that  young  man  at  Nain  whom  the  Master  had  restored 
to  his  home,  because  he  was  the  only  son  of  his  mother  and 
she  a  widow.  The  more  Mark  thought  about  it  the  more 
certain  he  was  that  he  ought  to  be  restored  to  his  home. 
He  heard  his  mother  calling  to  him  in  his  sleep.  He  dreamed 
that  he  saw  her  weeping  in  her  loneliness.  He  wept  himself 
when  he  was  awake  at  the  thought  of  her  sorrow  and  the 
poignant  realization  of  his  own  distance  from  all  the  famil- 
iar comforts  of  home.  Barnabas  said  to  him:  "Cheer  up! 
I  am  here,  and  I  will  see  that  you  come  to  no  harm." 
"Yes,"  said  Mark,  "you  are  here ;  but  where  is  my  mother  ? 
Nobody  can  take  the  place  of  my  mother."  Paul  said, 
"Come  along!  You  will  feel  better  after  awhile.  Nobody 
ever  died  of  homesickness  yet."  Then  Mark  said  to  him- 
self: "That  settles  it.  He  is  a  hard-hearted,  unfeeling 
enthusiast.  My  mother  never  would  talk  to  me  like  that.  I 
am  going  back  to  my  mother."  He  was  young  and  lacked 
as  yet  the  stamina  necessary  for  missionary  work. 

(2)  Added  to  this  general  feeling  of  homesickness  there 
was  the  certainty  that  he  must  endure  hardships  and  face 
dangers  and  suffer  persecutions  upon  which  he  had  not 
calculated,  if  he  went  any  farther  on  this  missionary 
journey.  At  Antioch  he  had  been  among  brethren.  In 
Cyprus  he  had  been  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  ancestral 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  107 

estates.  At  Perga,  however,  he  was  facing  toward  peoples 
and  lands  which  were  altogether  strange.  He  had  made 
some  inquiries  about  the  docks  and  in  the  taverns,  and  a 
number  of  people  had  told  him  that  the  very  road  upon 
which  Barnabas  and  Paul  were  now  thinking  of  traveling 
was  infested  with  brigands  and  they  would  be  in  peril  of 
robbers  all  the  way.  He  did  not  know  that  Paul  would  be 
stoned  and  left  for  dead  on  this  journey,  but  he  knew  that 
any  one  of  them  might  have  such  an  experience  almost  any 
day.  He  had  been  coddled  more  or  less  all  his  life,  and  this 
seemed  altogether  too  dangerous  to  him.  His  mother  would 
be  worried  about  him,  he  was  sure.  It  would  be  well  for 
him  to  go  back  and  assure  her  that  he  was  safe.  She  would 
not  want  him  to  run  into  any  unnecessary  perils  or  to  take 
any  unnecessary  risks.  "Do  not  be  afraid,"  said  Barnabas. 
"Stand  fast  in  the  faith,  quit  you  like  a  man,  be  strong," 
said  Paul.  "No,"  said  Mark.  "If  you  older  men  should 
die,  you  would  not  lose  much;  but  I  have  all  of  life  before 
me.    I  do  not  care  to  die  just  yet." 

(3)  There  may  have  been  another  reason  why  Mark  was 
disaffected  at  just  this  point  in  this  journey.  When  they 
had  left  Antioch  his  relative  Barnabas  was  the  leader  of  the 
expedition.  The  Holy  Spirit  had  said,  "Separate  me  Barna- 
bas and  Saul  for  this  work."  21  Sergius  Paulus  had  sum- 
moned Barnabas  and  Saul  to  hear  from  them  the  word 
of  God. 22  The  name  of  Barnabas  comes  first  in  these  pas- 
sages. He  evidently  was  the  recognized  head  of  the  com- 
pany, as  the  older  and  wealthier  and  better  known  and  more 
influential  man  of  the  two.  Yet  even  upon  Cyprus  Paul 
seems  to  have  been  the  more  prominent  of  the  two  workers, 
and  when  they  leave  Cyprus  the  record  reads,  "Now  Paul 
and  his  company  set  sail."  ^^  Henceforth  Barnabas  holds 
the  subordinate  position,  and  Paul  becomes  the  outstanding 

"Acts  13.  2. 
"Acts  13.  7. 
"Acts  13,  13. 


io8     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

figure  in  all  the  missionary  history.  Mark  may  have  been 
disgruntled  at  this  unexpected  deposing  of  his  cousin  and 
promoting  of  the  younger  and  less  sympathetic  man,  Paul. 
We  take  it  that  Barnabas  with  his  generous  heart  would 
yield  gracefully  to  the  trend  of  affairs  and  would  be  alto- 
gether willing  that  Paul  should  increase  while  he  should 
decrease,  if  the  mission  only  prospered  more  largely  in 
Paul's  hands;  but  Mark  was  a  younger  man  and  more  hot- 
headed and  impulsive. 

He  probably  argued  the  case  out  with  Barnabas  himself : 
"Were  you  not  a  Christian  long  before  this  man  Paul 
ever  came  into  the  church?  Did  you  not  introduce  him  at 
Jerusalem  and  become  sponsor  for  him  in  the  beginning? 
Does  he  not  owe  all  his  standing  among  the  brethren  in  the 
first  instance  to  you?  Did  you  not  recall  him  from  Tarsus 
to  Antioch  and  make  him  your  associate  in  the  flourishing 
work  there?  Have  you  not  been  his  backer  in  all  his 
career?  Does  he  not  owe  all  his  present  reputation  to  you? 
Did  not  the  church  at  Antioch  expect  you  to  be  the  leader 
in  this  expedition,  even  as  you  had  been  the  leader  in  their 
church  at  home?  Why  do  you  tamely  permit  him  to  take 
the  reins  in  his  hands?  Did  you  not  ask  me  to  accompany 
you  with  the  understanding  that  you  were  to  direct  affairs  ? 
Am  I  under  any  obligation  to  follow  any  leadership  but 
yours  ?  I  thought  we  two  would  decide  matters  to  suit  our- 
selves ;  but  if  Paul  is  going  to  decide  where  we  go  and  how 
long  we  stay,  and  we  are  simply  to  tag  along  wherever  he 
says,  a»d  if  this  is  going  to  be  'Paul  and  his  company'  after 
this,  I  get  off  at  this  station.  I  sail  for  home  from  this  port. 
This  is  more  than  I  bargained  for,  and  I  quit  right  here." 
Barnabas  doubtless  reasoned  with  him,  but  to  no  avail. 
Paul  may  have  suspected  that  there  was  some  family  jeal- 
ousy partly  responsible  for  Mark's  decision  to  depart  from 
them  and  return  to  Jerusalem,  and  it  did  not  appeal  to  him 
as  a  good  reason  for  quitting  a  missionary  enterprise.  He 
called  it  apostasy,  and  he  resented  it  deeply. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  109 

(4)  Still  another  and  fourth  reason  may  have  entered  into 
the  final  conclusion  of  Mark  at  this  time.  He  may  have  been 
surprised  at  the  tone  of  Paul's  preaching.  It  was  a  more 
liberal  type  of  preaching  than  that  to  which  he  had  been 
accustomed  in  Jerusalem.  Mark  was  a  Hebrew  of  the 
Hebrews,  and  at  Jerusalem  all  of  the  Christians  were  Jews, 
and  they  were  very  conscientious  and  very  scrupulous  in 
the  observance  of  all  the  regulations  of  the  Jewish  law. 
They  preached  the  necessity  of  these  things  even  as  they 
preached  the  necessity  of  faith  in  Jesus  the  Christ.  Paul 
was  not  insisting  upon  these  things.  He  was  permitting 
Gentiles  to  come  into  the  Christian  Church  without  becom- 
ing Jews.  He  did  not  seem  to  have  the  respect  for  the  Jew- 
ish customs  which  they  had  at  Jerusalem.  He  was  letting 
down  the  barriers  on  every  side. 

Mark  never  had  come  into  contact  with  such  looseness  in 
procedure.  He  was  shocked  by  it.  He  protested  to  Barna- 
bas: "You  ought  not  to  allow  it.  What  authority  has  Paul 
for  such  preaching?  Do  any  of  the  other  apostles  preach 
like  that?  Have  not  all  the  leaders  of  the  church  in  Jeru- 
salem insisted  upon  these  things  which  he  rules  out?  Did 
not  the  Master  observe  all  of  these  things?  Did  he  not  say 
that  he  had  not  come  to  destroy  the  law  or  the  prophets, 
but  to  fulfil  them  all  ?  Who  is  this  Paul,  then,  that  he  should 
set  up  his  dictum  against  that  of  the  Master  and  of  all  the 
disciples  of  the  Master  and  against  the  authority  of  Moses 
and  of  all  the  holy  prophets  of  old?  I  tell  you  this  is  an 
innovation  which  they  do  not  know  about  in  the  mother 
church  in  Jerusalem ;  for  if  they  knew  it,  they  would  put  a 
stop  to  it  right  away — you  may  depend  upon  that.  I  tell 
you  that  this  is  a  liberalism  which  is  most  destructive  in  its 
tendencies.  No  one  can  tell  what  the  outcome  of  such 
preaching  will  be.  If  the  Gentiles  accept  it  in  large  num- 
bers, it  may  be  that  the  heritage  will  be  wrested  away  from 
God's  chosen  people  and  all  the  promises  of  the  prophets 
will  be  set  at  naught  for  centuries  to  come.     I  tell  you  if 


no     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

this  is  to  be  the  style  of  preaching  on  this  mission  journey, 
I  will  have  nothing  more  to  do  with  it.  I  wash  my  hands 
of  the  whole  business.  I  am  going  back  to  Jerusalem  to  tell 
the  folks  there  all  about  it." 

Barnabas  was  troubled  in  his  own  mind  about  these 
things.  He  knew  well  enough  that  the  Jewish  brethren  had 
one  opinion  on  this  subject,  and  that  Paul  had  another.  He 
knew  that  what  Mark  said  was  true,  and  that  they  would  lay 
down  the  law  to  him  when  he  got  home  again.  He  was  not 
quite  clear  about  this  issue.  What  Paul  said  seemed  plaus- 
ible, and  it  did  seem  that  the  success  of  the  work  among 
the  Gentiles  depended  upon  the  Pauline  style  of  preaching. 
He  was  willing  to  let  things  slide  for  the  present.  As  long 
as  matters  were  progressing  prosperously  why  stir  up  any 
trouble  ?  What  need  was  there  for  any  rupture  at  the  pres- 
ent time?  Mark  was  a  younger  man  and  more  thorough- 
going in  his  theology.  He  thought  this  was  no  time  for 
complaisance  and  compromise.  Paul  might  call  him  an 
apostate  for  leaving  the  missionary  expedition  at  this  point, 
if  he  cared  to.  Mark  would  go  to  Jerusalem  and  tell  them 
that  Paul  was  an  apostate  from  the  true  faith. 

We  have  known  some  instances  in  our  own  generation 
where  a  young  man  felt  called  upon  to  purge  a  whole  church 
of  heresy  and  made  a  deal  of  trouble  for  himself  and  for 
others  by  bringing  charges  against  the  foremost  thinkers 
and  leaders  of  his  day  only  to  find  himself  universally  dis- 
credited at  last  and  to  awaken  to  the  perception  that  these 
older  and  better  and  wiser  men  were  in  possession  of  a 
higher  truth  than  he  had  yet  apprehended.  Mark  was 
just  such  a  young  man.  It  is  a  common  experience  for  some 
young  men  in  the  early  stage  of  their  development  to  run 
amuck  with  the  highest  forces  of  their  age,  to  attempt  to 
stem  the  tide  against  the  deeper  currents  of  Divine  Provi- 
dence, to  fight  with  all  sincerity  against  the  stars  in  their 
courses.  Happy  is  that  young  man  who  graduates  early  out 
of  this  mock-heroic  stage  of  his  existence  and  has  his  eyes 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK     in 

opened  to  see  things  as  they  are  and  to  repent  in  time  his 
futile  endeavor  to  defeat  the  purposes  of  God. 

We  take  it  that  Mark  went  back  to  Jerusalem  and  stirred 
up  a  lot  of  trouble  there.  He  may  have  come  down  to 
Antioch  later  with  certain  other  brethren  from  James  and 
have  helped  to  make  the  trouble  for  Peter  and  Barnabas 
and  Paul  which  is  recorded  in  the  second  chapter  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians.  Later,  however,  he  must  have  seen 
the  error  of  his  ways.  Like  the  church  at  large,  he  was 
convinced  by  the  logic  of  events,  and,  when  convinced  and 
repentant,  Paul  used  him  again  in  the  ministry. 

Now,  if  we  are  right  in  analyzing  the  state  of  Mark's  mind 
at  this  time  and  in  concluding  that  he  left  Barnabas  and 
Paul  partly  because  he  was  homesick,  and  partly  because 
he  was  cowardly,  and  partly  because  he  was  jealous,  and 
partly  because  he  was  suspicious  of  the  PauHne  preaching 
and  theolog>',  we  can  readily  understand  how  Barnabas  as 
the  young  man's  relative  might  have  been  disposed  to  be 
lenient  toward  his  faults  and  half-sympathetic  with  his 
opinions,  while  Paul,  on  the  contrary,  would  have  seen  no 
sufficient  reason  for  his  fickleness  of  conduct  or  instabil- 
ity of  character.  We  are  not  surprised,  therefore,  that  when 
Barnabas  proposed  that  John  Mark  should  accompany  them 
on  a  second  missionary  journey,  Paul  made  strenuous  ob- 
jection. 

Paul  wrote  afterward  to  the  Corinthians  that  Christian 
love,  ov  naQo^vverai,  never  has  a  paroxysm,^*  but  Luke  tells 
us  in  the  book  of  Acts  that  there  was  a  paroxysm,  tyevero 
di  nago^afiog,  over  this  question  of  the  choice  of  Mark 
as  an  attendant,  and  it  became  so  pronounced  that  Barnabas 
and  Paul  separated  at  this  time.^^  Somebody  must  have 
lost  his  experience  of  perfect  love  for  the  moment  at  least. 
We  think  that  it  was  Barnabas,  and  not  Paul,  for  we  are 
disposed  to  sympathize  with  Paul  in  his  position  at  this 

"  I  Cor.  13.  5. 
"Acts  15.  39. 


112     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

crisis.  We  think  that  Paul  was  justified  in  concluding  that 
Mark  had  shown  that  he  was  incapable  of  heroic  enter- 
prise. He  would  not  endure  hardship  like  a  good  soldier. 
He  was  likely  to  fail  in  an  emergency.  He  could  not  be 
trusted  in  such  serious  undertaking  as  they  then  proposed. 
He  was  governed  by  impulses  rather  than  by  principle.  He 
was  quick  to  advance  and  just  as  quick  to  lose  heart  and 
run  away. 

It  is  Paul's  attitude  at  this  time  which  leads  us  to  con- 
clude that  the  excuses  sometimes  offered  for  Mark  in  this 
juncture  are  not  justified  by  the  facts  of  the  case.  It  has 
been  suggested  that  the  Holy  Spirit  had  set  Barnabas  and 
Saul  aside  for  this  undertaking,  but  no  such  divine  con- 
straint had  been  put  upon  Mark,  and  he  therefore  felt  free 
to  abandon  the  enterprise  at  any  time.  We  are  told  that  he 
may  not  have  contemplated  so  long  a  journey  when  they  set 
out  and  so  long  an  absence  from  home ;  and  when  the  inva- 
sion of  Asia  Minor  was  determined  upon  he  felt  that  cir- 
cumstances demanded  his  return.  He  had  not  agreed  to 
go  any  farther,  and  he  was  sure  that  his  duty  led  him  back 
to  Jerusalem  rather  than  on  any  longer  tour.  His  mother's 
health  may  have  failed  or  circumstances  may  have  compelled 
his  immediate  attention  at  home.  He  may  have  been  sum- 
moned by  courier  and  thus  have  been  obliged  to  break  com- 
pany with  the  apostles  at  this  time. 

These  things  are  possibilities ;  but  if  there  had  been  actual 
mitigating  considerations,  Paul  would  have  given  them  due 
weight.  The  fact  that  he  seems  to  have  seen  no  good  ex- 
cuse for  Mark's  desertion  at  this  point  leads  us  to  conclude 
that  it  was  not  for  any  good  or  sufficient  reason,  but,  rather, 
for  some  one  or  for  all  of  the  reasons  we  have  suggested 
above.  Whatever  the  reasons  were,  they  seemed  to  Paul  to 
be  derogatory  to  Mark's  character.  We  are  disposed  to 
think  that  Paul  was  right  in  this  conclusion. 

If  Paul  read  Mark's  character  correctly,  Mark  must  have 
been  vacillating  and  uncertain  in  early  life.  Such  a  character 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  113 

is  not  very  useful  for  the  time  being;  but  the  one  good 
tiling  about  it  is  that  it  can  develop.  The  New 
Testament  record  would  lead  us  to  believe  that  the  unprom- 
ising beginning  of  Mark's  missionary  and  ministerial  career 
was  forgotten  and  forgiven  in  the  honorable  record  of  his 
later  life.  Barnabas  and  Peter  both  came  to  believe  that 
Paul  was  right  where  they  had  been  wrong,  and  Mark  prob- 
ably was  convinced  in  their  convincing.  He  never  became 
a  leading  character,  but  he  did  become  a  faithful  servant. 
He  attended  upon  Barnabas  and  upon  Peter  and  finally  upon 
Paul  himself,  and  he  was  a  help  and  a  comfort  to  all  of 
them.  In  the  New  Testament  record  he  never  assumes  any 
large  spiritual  responsibilities.  He  always  occupied  a  subor- 
dinate position.  He  may  have  been  a  business  manager  for 
the  apostles  or  a  teacher  and  catechist  for  their  converts, 
and  in  this  way  he  was  prepared  to  found  the  first  theolog- 
ical school  in  the  Christian  church  in  the  later  days.  He 
grew  in  grace  and  enjoyed  the  increasing  respect  of  his 
Christian  brethren.  In  his  old  age,  according  to  church 
tradition,  he  came  to  represent  something  of  the  authority 
of  the  great  apostles  who  had  died.  We  turn  to  these  tradi- 
tions for  some  other  facts  and  suggestions  concerning  him. 

4.  Traditions  Concerning  Him.  We  are  not  sure  that 
Mark  had  any  personal  connection  with  the  Lord's  ministry. 
Some  have  desired  to  establish  such  a  connection,  since  he  is 
one  of  the  four  evangelists,  but  they  have  not  been  able  to 
adduce  very  good  ground  for  such  a  conclusion.  Yet  it  is 
possible,  and  we  are  disposed  to  favor  the  supposition. 

(i)  A  writer  in  the  early  part  of  the  fourth  century,  in 
the  Dialogue  of  Adamantius  with  the  Marcionite,  tells  us 
that  Mark  was  one  of  the  seventy-two  disciples  sent  out  by 
the  Master  to  prepare  the  way  for  his  own  coming.^^ 

(2)  Toward  the  close  of  the  fourth  century  Epiphanius 
bears  witness  to  the  same  fact  and  then  adds  that  Mark  was 
one  of  the  disciples  who  went  back  and  walked  no  more  with 

"Luke  10.  I, 


114     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

the  Lord,  after  the  hard  sayings  in  the  synagogue  in 
Capernaum.27  It  is  more  than  probable  that  Mark's  apos- 
tasy at  Perga  is  responsible  for  the  tradition  that  he  had 
been  a  backslider  once  before,  and  that  he  had  deserted  the 
Master  even  as  he  later  deserted  the  apostle  Paul.  We 
trust  for  Mark's  sake  that  this  tradition  is  not  true. 

(3)  Alexander  in  the  sixth  century  says  that  the  aged 
had  told  him  that  Mark  was  the  man  bearing  the  pitcher  of 
water  who  led  the  two  disciples  to  the  room  prepared  for 
the  eating  of  the  passover.^s  This  tradition  probably  was 
attached  to  the  still  earlier  one  in  the  sixth  century  recorded 
by  Theodosius,  who  said  that  the  house  of  Mark  the  evan- 
gelist was  the  one  in  which  the  Lord  ate  the  Last  Supper 
with  his  disciples,  and  the  one  in  which  the  disciples  were 
gathered  together  after  the  resurrection  when  they  re- 
ceived the  baptism  of  Pentecost.  It  is,  of  course,  a  possi- 
bility that  the  home  of  Mary  the  mother  of  Mark  had  in 
it  a  large  upper  room  which  she  placed  at  the  disposal  of 
the  Master  and  of  his  disciples  during  those  last  days  of 
his  ministry,  and  that  the  Last  Supper  was  eaten  there,  and 
that  the  disciples  were  assembled  there  when  the  Lord  ap- 
peared to  them  on  the  evening  of  the  first  Easter  day  and  on 
the  Sunday  following,  and  that  they  met  there  from  day  to 
day  to  wait  for  the  promised  blessing  of  Pentecost,  and  that 
it  was  a  hallowed  meeting  place  for  praise  and  prayer  there- 
after for  the  Jerusalem  church.  It  was  to  that  room  that 
Peter  made  his  way  when  released  from  prison,  and  there 
he  found  the  assembly  engaged  in  prayer  in  his  behalf.  It 
may  be  that  all  these  great  events  in  the  history  of  the 
church  took  place  inside  one  building  and  in  one  upper  room. 
However,  we  might  have  expected  the  New  Testament 
writers  to  make  some  mention  of  that  fact,  if  it  were  one; 
and  in  their  silence  we  cannot  be  sure  of  it  on  merely  sixth- 
century  authority. 

''  John  6.  66.    Haer.,  li,  6. 
**Mark  14.  13. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  115 

(4)  It  has  been  suggested  by  still  later  writers  that  Mark 
was  the  young  man  who  followed  with  Jesus,  after  the  seiz- 
ure in  the  garden  of  Gethsemane,  of  whom  we  read  that  he 
had  only  a  linen  cloth  cast  about  him,  over  his  naked  body : 
and  that  when  they  laid  hold  upon  him  he  left  the  linen 
cloth  and  fled  naked.^^  Mark  is  the  only  one  who  records 
this  rather  trivial  incident,  and  no  very  good  reason  can  be 
assigned  for  his  introducing  it  into  his  brief  narrative,  unless 
it  may  be  that  he  had  some  personal  interest  in  it.  If  he 
himself  were  this  young  man,  he  might  have  inserted  the 
story  as  a  kind  of  personal  autograph,  as  much  as  to  say: 
"I  know  something  about  these  things  from  personal  expe- 
rience. At  this  point  I  myself  enter  into  touch  with  them." 
This  again  is  not  impossible,  and  we  may  even  grant  that 
it  is  probable  to  some  extent. 

Lange,  Olshausen,  Thomson,  Luckock,  and  others  are 
ready  to  identify  this  young  man  with  Mark.  Zahn  says: 
"He  paints  a  small  picture  of  himself  in  the  corner  of  his 
work  which  contains  so  many  figures.  What  he  narrates 
of  himself  is  no  heroic  deed,  but  only  a  thoughtless  action  of 
his  youth."  ^o  Mark  had  gone  to  bed  in  his  own  home  on 
that  night  of  the  Last  Supper,  and  when  Jesus  and  the  dis- 
ciples left  the  house  he  was  moved  by  curiosity  or  anxiety 
to  follow  them,  and  without  waiting  to  dress  he  had  thrown 
this  linen  cloth  about  him  and  had  crept  forth  to  see  what 
was  to  happen.  It  was  a  night  of  great  adventure  for  the 
boy,  and  with  the  boy's  facility  for  being  on  hand  when  any 
excitement  occurred  he  saw  the  arrest  of  Jesus  and  was  so 
near  the  soldiers  that  one  of  them  snatched  at  him  and  was 
left  with  the  linen  cloth  in  his  hand  while  the  lad  scurried 
away.  It  was  not  a  very  important  matter  to  anyone  except 
himself.  In  later  years  he  may  have  taken  the  opportunity 
of  chronicling  it,  to  show  that  he  had  a  small  part  in  the 
great  events  of  that  night. 

"Mark  14.  51,  52. 

*•  Zahn,  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  vol.  ii,  p.  494. 


ii6     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

(5)  We  learn  from  Eusebius,  Epiphanius,  Jerome,  Ni- 
cephorus,  and  others  that  Peter  sent  Mark  as  his  substitute 
from  Rome  to  Egypt  and  that  Mark  founded  the  catechetical 
school  at  Alexandria  in  Egypt^i  which  may  claim  to  be  the 
first  theological  school  of  the  Christian  church  and  which 
had  a  most  notable  succession  of  masters  in  Pantsenus, 
Clement,  Origen,  and  Dionysius;  and  Athanasius  came 
later.  Mark  became  the  first  bishop  of  the  church  in  Alex- 
andria and  he  was  martyred  there  at  the  feast  of  Serapis, 
A.  D.  68.  W.  F.  Warren  thus  describes  the  martyrdom: 
"On  the  feast  day  of  Serapis,  tutelar  deity  of  Alexandria, 
the  holy  evangelist,  then  laboring  in  that  city,  fell  into  the 
hands  of  the  maddened  heathen.  They  tied  his  feet  to  a 
chariot,  and  dragged  him  through  the  streets  and  down  to 
the  seashore,  dragged  him  the  livelong  day  over  hot  sands 
and  stony  banks,  everywhere  marking  their  track  with 
shreds  of  flesh  and  a  lengthening  trail  of  blood.  Ex- 
hausted at  last,  and  marvelling  that  their  victim  died  not, 
they  cast  him  into  a  dungeon  for  the  night.  On  the  next 
morning  they  found  him  wondrously  refreshed  and  quick- 
ened by  two  visions  of  glory,  which  had  been  vouchsafed  to 
him  during  the  darkness.  Again  they  bound  him  to  the 
chariot,  and  dragged  his  mangled  form  till  God  in  mercy 
granted  him  in  death  a  happy  deliverance.  History  tells 
us  that  a  little  more  than  three  centuries  from  that  day 
the  colossal  image  of  Serapis  was  dragged,  mutilated  and 
dishonored,  through  those  same  streets  of  Alexandria,  and 
Mark  proclaimed  the  patron  saint  of  the  city.  The  proud 
temple  of  the  idol — one  of  the  grandest  in  the  whole  world 
— was  demolished  while  fanes  sacred  to  Mark  began  to  rise 
throughout  the  earth."  ^2 

If  Mark  died  such  a  martyr  death,  he  surely  made  suffi- 
cient atonement  for  all  the  weakness  of  his  early  youth. 

*'  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccles.,  ii,  16.    Epiphanius,  Haer.,  li,  6.    Jerome, 
De  vir.  illus.,  8.    Nicephorus,  Hist.  Excles.,  ii,  42. 
*^  Compare  Nicephorus,  Hist.  Eccl.,  ii,  43. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  117 

He  had  attained  unto  the  heroic  mold  at  last.  He  was  a 
worthy  successor  to  Peter  and  Paul,  as  they  had  worthily 
succeeded  their  martyred  Lord. 

(6)  Early  in  the  ninth  century  Mark's  body  is  said  to  have 
been  removed  from  Egypt  to  Venice.  On  the  Piazza  of 
Saint  Mark  the  Venetians  built  a  stately  five-domed  cathe- 
dral. They  called  it  the  Cathedral  of  Saint  Mark  and  there 
his  bones  are  interred,  and  he  is  the  patron  saint  of  the  city 
of  Venice  to  this  day. 

Ruskin  thus  describes  the  interior  of  Saint  Mark's  in 
Venice:  "It  is  lost  in  still  deeper  twiHght,  to  which  the  eye 
must  become  accustomed  for  some  moments  before  the  form 
of  the  building  can  be  traced;  and  then  there  opens  before 
us  a  vast  cave,  hewn  out  into  the  form  of  a  cross,  and  di- 
vided into  shadowy  aisles  by  many  pillars.  Round  the 
domes  of  its  roof  the  light  enters  only  through  narrow 
apertures  like  large  stars;  and  here  and  there  a  ray  or  two 
from  some  far-away  casement  wanders  into  the  darkness, 
and  casts  a  narrow  phosphoric  stream  upon  the  waves  of 
marble  that  heave  and  fall  in  a  thousand  colors  along  the 
floor.  What  else  there  is  of  light,  is  from  torches,  or  silver 
lamps,  burning  ceaselessly  in  the  recesses  of  the  chapels;  the 
roof  sheeted  with  gold,  and  the  polished  walls  covered  with 
alabaster,  give  back,  at  every  curve  and  angle,  some  feeble 
gleaming  to  the  flames;  and  the  glories  round  the  heads  of 
the  sculptured  saints  flash  out  upon  us  as  we  pass  them, 
and  sink  again  into  the  gloom. 

"Under  foot  and  overhead,  a  continual  succession  of 
crowded  imagery,  one  picture  passing  into  another,  as  in  a 
dream;  the  passions  and  pleasures  of  human  Ufe  symbol- 
ized together,  and  the  mystery  of  its  redemption;  for  the 
mazes  of  interwoven  lines  and  changeful  pictures  lead  al- 
ways at  last  to  the  cross,  lifted  and  carved  in  every  place 
and  upon  every  stone;  sometimes  with  the  serpent  of  eter- 
nity wrapt  round  it,  sometimes  with  doves  beneath  its  arms, 
and  sweet  herbage  growing  forth  from  its  feet;  but  con- 


ii8     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

spicuous  most  of  all  on  the  great  rood  that  crosses  the 
church  before  the  altar,  raised  in  bright  blazonry  against 
the  shadow  of  the  apse.  .  .  .  It  is  the  cross  that  is  first 
seen,  and  always,  burning  in  the  center  of  the  temple;  and 
every  dome  and  hollow  of  its  roof  has  the  figure  of  Christ 
in  the  utmost  height  of  it,  raised  in  power,  or  returning  in 
judgment.    .    .    . 

"Darkness  and  mystery;  confused  recesses  of  building; 
artificial  light  employed  in  small  quantity,  but  maintained 
with  a  constancy  which  seems  to  give  it  a  kind  of  sacred- 
ness;  preciousness  of  material  easily  comprehended  by  the 
vulgar  eye ;  close  air  loaded  with  a  sweet  and  peculiar  odor 
associated  only  with  religious  services;  solemn  music,  and 
tangible  idols  or  images  having  popular  legends  attached  to 
them — these  are  assembled  in  Saint  Mark's  to  a  degree,  as 
far  as  I  know,  unexampled  in  any  other  European 
church.    .    •  . 

"Nor  is  this  interior  without  effect  on  the  minds  of  the 
people.  At  every  hour  of  the  day  there  are  groups  collected 
before  the  various  shrines,  and  solitary  worshipers  scattered 
through  the  darker  places  of  the  church,  evidently  in  prayer 
both  deep  and  reverent,  and,  for  the  most  part,  profoundly 
sorrowful.  The  devotees  at  the  greater  number  of  the  re- 
nowned shrines  of  Romanism  may  be  seen  murmuring  their 
appointed  prayers  with  wandering  eyes  and  unengaged 
gestures ;  but  the  step  of  the  stranger  does  not  disturb  those 
who  kneel  on  the  pavement  of  Saint  Mark's;  and  hardly  a 
moment  passes,  from  early  morning  to  sunset,  in  which  we 
may  not  see  some  half-veiled  figure  enter  beneath  the 
Arabian  porch,  cast  itself  into  long  abasement  on  the  floor 
of  the  temple,  and  then  rising  slowly  with  more  confirmed 
step,  and  with  a  passionate  kiss  and  clasp  of  the  arms  given 
to  the  feet  of  the  crucifix,  by  which  the  lamps  burn  always 
in  the  northern  aisle,  leave  the  church,  as  if  comforted."  ^^ 


**  Stones  of  Venice,  II,  iv,  pp.  i8,  19,  20. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  119 

The  Cathedral  of  Saint  Mark's  is  a  worthy  monument  to 
the  evangehst.  The  Venetians  consider  the  lion  to  be 
Mark's  symbol,  and  it  may  have  been  an  appropriate  symbol 
for  his  later  life.  He  died,  one  of  the  heroes  of  the  faith; 
but  the  j\lark  of  the  New  Testament  books  was  first  of  all 
a  calf  and  then  an  ox  in  patient  ministry ;  and  we  think  that 
the  ox  is  the  most  appropriate  symbol  for  the  Gospel  he  has 
written.  Matthew  pictured  Jesus  as  the  Lion  of  Judah  and 
the  King  of  Israel;  Mark  pictures  him  rather  as  the  ox 
treading  the  furrow  of  his  appointed  task,  the  Servant  of  all, 
busied  in  ceaseless  ministry. 

We  now  have  followed  Mark  from  his  callow  youth  to  his 
mellow  old  age,  and  we  have  found  his  character  changing 
for  the  better  all  along  the  line.  He  was  hot-hearted  and 
wrong-headed  in  the  beginning,  but  his  conduct  cooled  down 
and  his  creed  cleared  up  in  time.  It  is  to  Mark's  credit  that 
he  could  work  at  last  in  harmony  with  such  opposite  char- 
acters as  Peter  and  Paul.  It  is  to  his  credit  that  he  gave  a 
Hfetime  of  eflfort  to  the  furtherance  of  the  Christian  cause. 
It  is  to  his  everlasting  credit  that  he  wrote  the  earliest  and 
most  authentic  narrative  of  the  gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  It  is  to  the  traditions  concerning  the  writing  of  that 
Gospel  that  we  turn  next. 

II.  Traditions  as  to  the  Writing  of  the  Gospel 

I.  Papias  was  bishop  of  Hierapolis  in  Phrygia  in  the  first 
half  of  the  second  century.  Eusebius  in  his  Church  History 
has  quoted  the  tradition  which  Papias  gives  in  regard  to 
Mark,  the  author  of  the  Gospel,  in  the  following  words; 
"Mark,  having  become  the  interpreter  of  Peter,  wrote  down 
accurately,  though  not  indeed  in  order,  whatsoever  he  re- 
membered of  the  things  said  or  done  by  Christ.  For  he 
neither  heard  the  Lord  nor  followed  him,  but  afterward,  as 
I  said,  he  followed  Peter,  who  adapted  his  teaching  to  the 
needs  of  his  hearers,  but  with  no  intention  of  giving  a  con- 


120     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

nected  account  of  the  Lord's  discourses,  so  that  Mark  com- 
mitted no  error  while  he  thus  wrote  some  things  as  he  re- 
membered them.  For  he  was  careful  of  one  thing,  not  to 
omit  any  of  the  things  which  he  had  heard,  and  not  to  state 
any  of  them  falsely."  ^^  This  is  the  earliest  statement  in 
church  literature  concerning  the  writing  of  our  second 
Gospel.  There  are  three  things  to  be  noted  in  it :  first,  that 
Mark  was  not  an  eyewitness  of  these  things  which  he 
records;  second,  that  he  simply  reports  the  preaching  of 
Peter  concerning  them ;  and,  third,  that  Papias  has  all  con- 
fidence in  the  accuracy  of  the  report.  Of  these  three  facts 
the  most  important  is  that  the  authority  of  Peter  is  placed 
behind  the  narrative  of  the  second  Gospel.  This  seems  to 
have  been  the  universal  belief  in  the  early  church. 

2.  Justin  Martyr,  about  the  middle  of  the  second  century, 
quotes  the  statement  found  only  in  Mark  3.  17  as  from 
"Peter's  Memoirs."  ^5  If  this  name  is  rightly  given  to  the 
second  Gospel,  it  ought  to  be  called  "The  Gospel  according 
to  Peter  as  recorded  by  Mark."  Mark  is  only  the  scribe, 
and  Peter  is  the  responsible  authority.  This  was  the  con- 
clusion of  Tertullian,  as  we  shall  see  later,  and  it  is  repre- 
sented among  modern  writers  by  Paul  Ewald,  who  thinks 
that  Mark's  contribution  was  confined  to  arrangement  of 
the  material  and  nothing  more,  and  who  says  that  a  modern 
writer  would  have  formulated  the  title  somewhat  as  follows, 
"Favorite  reminiscences  of  Peter's,  from  the  time  when  he 
himself  companied  with  Jesus  in  GaUlee  and  on  the  way  to 
Jerusalem,  put  together  in  some  scenes  and  edited  by 
Mark."  ^e  On  the  other  hand,  that  the  early  church  believed 
that  Mark  was  the  responsible  author  of  the  book  is  evi- 
denced by  the  superscription  given  it  in  all  our  codices.  It 
never  is  Kara  rterpov,  "according  to  Peter,"  but  always 
Kard  Map/tov,    "according  to   Mark."     Peter  may  be  the 

"  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccles.,  iii,  39. 

•»  Dial.  106. 

"Ewald,  Das  Hauptproblein  der  Evangelienfrage,  p.  26. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  121 

"literary  grandfather"  ^7  of  the  second  Gospel,  but  he  is  not 
the  father  nor  direct  literary  author  of  it.  That  responsi- 
bility belongs  to  Mark. 

3.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  at  the  end  of  the  second  cen- 
tury, as  reported  by  Eusebius  in  his  Church  History,  says : 
"The  Gospel  according  to  Mark  had  this  occasion.  As 
Peter  had  preached  the  word  publicly  at  Rome,  and  declared 
the  gospel  by  the  Spirit,  many  who  were  present  requested 
that  Mark,  who  had  followed  him  for  a  long  time  and  re- 
membered his  sayings,  should  write  them  out.  And  having 
composed  the  Gospel,  he  gave  it  to  those  who  had  requested 
it.  When  Peter  learned  of  this,  he  neither  directly  forbade 
nor  encouraged  it."  ^^  It  would  seem  from  this  account 
that  the-  second  Gospel  was  written  at  Rome,  and  that  its 
composition  was  begun,  if  not  finished,  during  Peter's  life 
and  ministry  there. 

4.  Irenaeus  of  Gaul,  writing  about  the  same  date,  says 
that  Matthew  wrote  his  Gospel  while  Peter  and  Paul  were 
preaching  at  Rome,  and  laying  the  foundations  of  the 
Church;  and  then  he  adds,  "After  their  departure,  Mark, 
the  disciple  and  interpreter  of  Peter,  did  also  hand  down  to 
us  in  writing  what  had  been  preached  by  Peter."  ^9  Irenaeus 
agrees  with  the  other  church  Fathers  in  making  the  Gospel 
the  record  of  the  preaching  of  Peter,  but  he  differs  with 
Clement  in  placing  the  composition  of  the  Gospel  after 
Peter's  death,  if  by  the  apostles'  departure  he  means  their 
death. 

5.  Tertullian  says  that  the  Gospel  "which  Mark  pub- 
lished may  be  affirmed  to  be  Peter's,  whose  interpreter 
Mark  was."  "o 

6.  Origen,  as  reported  by  Eusebius,  says,  "I  have  learned 


"  Morison,  Commentary,  p.  xxviii. 
*  Eusebius,  op.  cit.,  vi,  14. 
"Adv.  Haer.,  iii,  i. 
'"Adv.  Marc,  iv.  $. 


122     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

by  tradition  that  the  second  Gospel  is  by  Mark,  who  com- 
posed it  according  to  the  instructions  of  Peter,  who  in  his 
catholic  epistle  acknowledges  him  as  a  son."  ^i 

7.  Eusebius  on  his  own  account  declares :  "So  greatly  did 
the  splendor  of  piety  illumine  the  minds  of  Peter's  hearers 
that  they  were  not  satisfied  with  hearing  once  only,  and  were 
not  content  with  the  unwritten  teaching  of  the  divine  gos- 
pel, but  with  all  sorts  of  entreaties  they  besought  Mark,  a 
follower  of  Peter,  and  the  one  whose  Gospel  is  extant, 
that  he  would  leave  them  a  written  monument  of  the  doc- 
trine which  had  been  orally  communicated  to  them.  Nor  did 
they  cease  until  they  had  prevailed  with  the  man,  and  had 
thus  become  the  occasion  of  the  written  Gospel  which  bears 
the  name  of  Mark.  And  they  say  that  Peter,  when  he  had 
learned,  through  a  revelation  of  the  Spirit,  of  that  which 
had  been  done,  was  pleased  with  the  zeal  of  the  men,  and 
that  the  work  obtained  the  sanction  of  his  authority  for  the 
purpose  of  being  used  in  the  churches."  ^^ 

All  of  these  early  authorities  agree  that  Mark  simply 
represents  Peter  in  his  writing.  The  Christian  Church  has 
held  very  generally  to  this  opinion.  In  Christian  art,  repre- 
sented by  such  paintings  as  those  of  Angelico  da  Fiesole  in 
the  Gallery  of  Florence  and  of  Bellini  in  the  Academy  of 
Venice  and  of  Bonvicino  in  the  Brera  at  Milan,  Mark  is 
the  scribe  taking  notes  while  Peter  is  preaching  in  the  public 
assembly  or  writing  to  Peter's  dictation  in  the  seclusion  of 
some  private  room.  The  impression  made  by  the  book  as 
we  read  it  to-day  corresponds  to  the  facts  handed  down  by 
tradition;  for,  as  Archdeacon  Allen  says:  "Mark,  with  its 
incompleteness,  its  presupposition  of  knowledge  on  the  part 
of  its  readers,  its  unevenness,  its  want  of  historical  setting, 
is  unique  in  literature.  It  is  not  a  history,  not  a  biography, 
not  a  memoir.    It  is  intended  not  to  inform,  but  to  remind. 


*'  Eusebius,  op.  cit.,  vi,  25. 
**  Eusebius,  op.  cit.,  ii,  15. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  123 

Those  who  read  it  will  read  what  they  have  heard  before."  ■*^ 
We  can  easily  believe  that  the  first  readers  of  this  book 
would  be  reminded  of  Peter  at  every  turn. 

There  seems  to  be  some  difference  of  opinion  among  the 
church  Fathers,  however,  as  to  the  time  of  Mark's  writing, 
whether  it  took  place  during  Peter's  lifetime  or  after  his 
death.  It  may  be  that  the  explanation  of  this  difiference  lies 
in  the  fact  that  Mark  began  his  work  while  Peter  was  liv- 
ing and  that  Peter  gave  his  sanction  to  the  notes  which 
Mark  had  then  made,  but  that  the  Gospel  in  its  present  form 
was  published  only  after  Peter's  death.  If  this  be  true,  it 
would  be  difficult  to  give  an  exact  date  for  the  composition 
or  the  pubhcation  of  the  Gospel.  It  is  possible  that  Mark 
himself  would  have  been  puzzled  to  do  it.  Some  time  be- 
tween A.  D.  60  and  70  it  is  possible  that  the  work  was  begun 
and  revised  and  completed.  The  more  exact  determination 
of  the  date  would  depend  somewhat  upon  the  relation  be- 
lieved to  exist  between  the  second  Gospel  and  the  other 
synoptics.  If  Mark  is  dependent  upon  them,  it  must  be 
assigned  to  a  later  date.  If  they  are  dependent  upon  Mark, 
its  date  must,  of  course,  be  earlier  than  these. 

8.  Augustine**  takes  the  position  that  the  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  Mark  is  simply  an  epitome  or  summary  of  the  Gospel 
according  to  Matthew.  Augustine's  great  influence  in  the 
church  led  to  the  general  adoption  of  this  opinion  that 
Mark  simply  had  abbreviated  the  contents  of  Matthew,  and 
consequently  Mark  was  held  in  comparatively  light  esteem 
for  many  centuries.  Speaking  of  Augustine's  dictum, 
Maclean  says:  "Seldom  has  one  short  sentence  had  such  an 
unfortunate  effect  in  distorting  a  judgment  on  a  literary 
work;  and  largely  in  consequence  of  it  Mark  has  been  gen- 
erally neglected.  The  second  Gospel  seems  hardly  to  have 
engaged  the  attention  of  commentators;  and  the  writer 
known  as  Victor  of  Antioch,  in  the  fifth  century  or  later, 

**  Expository  Times,  vol.  xi,  p.  425, 
"  De  Consensu  Evangelistorum,  i,  3. 


124     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

says  that  he  has  not  been  able  to  find  a  single  author  who 
had  expounded  it."  ^^ 

Maclean  begins  his  discussion  of  the  Gospel  with  the 
sentence,  "No  book  of  the  New  Testament  has  experienced 
such  a  change  in  public  estimation  as  the  second  Gospel." 
That  means  that  the  opinion  of  Augustine  has  been  reversed 
at  last,  and  that  the  Gospel  according  to  Mark  has  come  to 
the  place  of  first  honor  among  the  Gospels  as  the  earliest 
and  most  authentic  of  them  all.  Augustine's  opinion  has 
been  represented  among  more  modern  scholars  by  Griesbach, 
Fritzsche,  Bleek,  Baur,  De  Wette,  Delitzsch,  Kostlin, 
Kahnis,  and  others.  The  present  tendency,  however,  is 
toward  the  recognition  of  the  independence  and  the  priority 
of  Mark.  The  following  authorities  may  be  quoted  as 
representatives  of  this  view:  Bruno  Bauer,  Ewald,  Gould, 
Hitzig,  Holtzmann,  Lachmann,  Maclean,  Meyer,  Reuss, 
Salmon,  Salmond,  Schenkel,  Scholten,  Storr,  Ritschl, 
Thiersch,  Volkmar,  Weiss,  Weisse,  Weizsacker,  Wilke, 
Wright.^®  These  men  stand  for  very  different  schools  of 
thought;  but  they  all  agree  that  in  the  second  Gospel  we 
have  the  primitive  account  of  the  life  and  labors  of  the  Lord. 
We  are  ready  to  agree  with  them,  and  to  conclude  that  this 
Gospel  was  written  at  Rome,  as  Irenasus,  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, Eusebius,  Jerome,  and  Epiphanius  have  testified; 
and  at  some  time  between  60  and  70  A.  D.  Archdeacon 
Allen  is  ready  to  say,  "I  think  it  probable  that  critical  opin- 
ion will  shortly  move  in  the  direction  of,  say,  50  A.  D.,  or 
shortly  before,  for  the  publication  of  a  Greek  Second 
Gospel."  47 

"  Dictionary  of  Christ  and  the  Gospels,  vol.  ii,  p.  122. 

*"  Wright  says,  "Saint  Mark's  is  the  archaic  Gospel.  .  ,  .  It  is 
simple  where  the  others  are  complex ;  it  is  meager  where  they  are 
rich ;  it  is  a  chronicle  while  they  are  histories ;  it  contains  Latin  and 
Aramaic  words  which  they  have  translated  or  removed.  .  .  . 
Augustine,  therefore,  is  wrong  in  every  particular." — Dictionary  of 
Christ  and  the  Gospels,  vol.  ii,  p.  85. 

"  Expository  Times,  vol.  xxi,  p.  444. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  125 

III.  Characterizations  of  the  Gospel 

I.  This  is  The  Gospel  for  the  Latin  Peoples. 

If  we  are  correct  in  following  the  church  tradition  as  to 
the  place  of  writing,  it  would  seem  to  follow  as  a  matter  of 
course  that  a  Gospel  written  at  Rome  would  have  especial 
reference  to  the  circumstances  and  the  needs  of  the  people 
in  that  city  and  of  that  race.  The  internal  evidence  points 
in  the  same  direction.  The  Gospel  according  to  Matthew 
evidently  was  prepared  especially  for  the  Jews.  That  this 
is  not  true  of  the  Gospel  according  to  Mark  seems  clear  for 
the  following  reasons : 

(i)  Mark  omits  all  Hebrew  genealogies.  They  would 
not  be  of  interest  to  the  Romans  as  they  were  to  the  Jews. 
Mark  has  nothing  to  say  about  the  birth  or  the  parentage  of 
Jesus.  He  does  not  mention  Joseph  anywhere,  and  Mary's 
name  occurs  only  once,  in  the  question,  "Is  not  this  the 
carpenter,  the  son  of  Mary?"*^ 

(2)  There  is  no  insistence  upon  the  binding  obligation  of 
the  Jewish  law  in  this  Gospel.  The  word  "law"  does  not 
occur  in  the  whole  Gospel.  It  is  found  in  Matthew  eight 
times,  and  in  Luke  nine  times,  and  in  John  fifteen  times.  It 
is  a  strange  fact  that  Mark  never  uses  the  word. 

(3)  There  are  fewer  references  to  the  Old  Testament  in 
the  second  Gospel  than  in  any  of  the  other  three.  Only  one 
such  reference  is  peculiar  to  Mark,  the  one  with  which  he 
begins ;  and  that,  according  to  our  text,  is  wrongly  ascribed 
to  Isaiah.  It  is  really  from  Mai.  3.  i,  and  Mark  inserts  it 
before  the  quotation  from  Isa.  40.  3,  which  is  found  in  the 
other  Synoptics.  It  is  the  only  passage  in  which  Mark 
quotes  an  author  by  name,  and  in  this  single  venture  into  the 
Old  Testament  field  on  his  own  account  he  makes  a  mistake 
in  the  name. 

(4)  Mark  translates  certain  Aramaic  words  which  he 
has  preserved  in  his  Gospel,  as  if  he  were  sure  that  those 

"  Mark  6.  3. 


126     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

for  whom  he  was  writing  would  not  understand  them ;  such 
as  "Boanerges,  which  is,  Sons  of  thunder,"  *^  and  "Tal- 
itha  cumi;  which  is,  being  interpreted,  Damsel,  I  say  unto 
thee,  Arise;"  ^^  and  "Corban,  that  is  to  say.  Given ;"^i  and 
"Ephphatha,  that  is.  Be ,  opened ;"  ^^  ^nd  "The  son  of 
Timaeus,  Bartimseus ;"  ss  and  "Abba,  Father;"  54  and  "Gol- 
gotha, which  is,  being  interpreted.  The  place  of  a  skull ;"  ^^ 
and  "Eloi,  Eloi,  lama,  sabachthani?  which  is,  being  inter- 
preted, My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou  forsaken  me?"  s® 

(5)  In  the  same  way  Mark  explains  Jewish  customs  as 
he  would  not  think  of  doing  if,  like  Matthew,  he  had  been 
writing  to  Jews;  as,  for  example,  in  the  parenthesis  found 
in  7.  3,  4,  "The  Pharisees,  and  all  the  Jews,  except  they 
wash  their  hands  diligently,  eat  not,  holding  the  tradition  of 
the  elders;  and  when  they  come  from  the  market  place, 
except  they  wash  themselves,  they  eat  not;  and  many  other 
things  there  be,  which  they  have  received  to  hold,  wash- 
ings ot  cups,  and  pots,  and  brasen  vessels."  Again,  in 
12.  18  Mark  explains  the  creed  of  the  Sadducees,  and 
in  2.  18,  he  says  that  the  disciples  of  John  and  of  the  Phari- 
sees used  to  fast,  and  in  14,  12  and  15.  6,  42  Mark  adds  such 
explanations  of  the  passover  observances  as  he  thinks  those 
who  were  not  Jews  might  need.  He  thinks  it  necessary  to 
say  that  the  Jordan  is  the  river  of  Jordan^'''  and  that  the 
Mount  of  Olives  is  over  against  the  temple.^^ 

Evidently,  he  is  not  writing  to  Jews.  Is  there  anything 
which  will  help  us  to  determine  more  explicitly  for  whom 
Mark  has  composed  this  Gospel?  We  think  that  we  can 
add  to  the  negative  considerations  which  we  have  now 
adduced  several  positive  indications  which  point  directly 
toward  Rome. 


**  Mark  3.  17.  **  Mark  14.  36. 

"  Mark  5.  41.  '"  Mark  15.  22. 

"Mark  7.  ll.  "Mark  15.  34. 

"Mark  7.  34.  "Mark  i.  5. 

"Mark  10.  46.  "Mark  13.  3. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  127 

(6)  Mark's  name  is  in  itself  a  suggestion  of  Roman  asso- 
ciations. We  already  have  seen  that  his  original  name  was 
the  Hebrew  name  ''John,"  and  that  this  name  fell  into  disuse 
in  the  Christian  Church  and  was  replaced  by  the  Roman 
name  "Alarcus."  It  may  have  been  that  this  Roman  name 
took  the  place  of  his  Hebrew  name  because  he  himself  had 
ceased  to  be  associated  in  thought  with  Jerusalem  and  had 
come  to  be  identified  with  Rome. 

(7)  There  is  a  curious  collocation  of  names  in  Mark 
15.  21.  There  we  are  told  that  Simon  of  Cyrene,  who 
was  compelled  to  bear  the  cross  to  Golgotha,  was  "the 
father  of  Alexander  and  Rufus."  Godet  says:  "This  in- 
dication evidently  presupposes  that  the  two  sons  of  Simon 
were  persons  well  known  to,  and  of  consideration  in,  the 
church  for  which  the  author  was  writing;  there  is  no 
similar  instance  in  the  other  Gospels.  If,  then,  we  can 
ascertain  where  these  men  lived,  we  shall  know  the  place 
from  which  the  author  wrote.  The  Epistle  to  the  Ro- 
mans here  comes  to  our  aid.  'Salute,'  says  Paul  to  the 
church  in  Rome,  'Rufus,  chosen  in  the  Lord,  and  his  mother 
and  mine,'  Rom.  16.  13.  The  family  of  Simon  had  therefore 
migrated  to  Rome.  Paul,  who  had  known  them  in  the  East, 
sends  his  greeting  to  them  in  that  city.  And  the  author  of 
our  second  Gospel,  having  the  surviving  members  of  the 
family  before  his  eyes  at  the  time  he  was  writing,  felt  con- 
strained to  do  honor  to  the  unique  part  which  its  head  had 
played  in  the  drama  of  the  cross.  These  indications  seem  to 
me  clear  enough."  ^^  Rufus  is  mentioned  in  the  New 
Testament  in  these  two  passages  alone.  Simon  is  said  to  be 
the  father  of  Rufus,  and  we  learn  that  a  Rufus  was  a 
prominent  member  of  the  church  at  Rome.  If  we  identify 
these  two  Rufuses  as  one  and  the  same  man,  we  can  readily 
see  how  Mark,  writing  for  the  Roman  church,  would  men- 
tion the  relationship  between  Simon  and  Rufus,  an  item  of 


'  New  Testament  Studies,  p.  29. 


128     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

information  which  would  be  of  interest  to  that  church  espe- 
cially, if  not  to  that  church  alone. 

(8)  There  are  more  Latinisms  in  this  Gospel  than  in  any 
other  book  of  the  New  Testament.  There  are  some  found 
in  Mark  which  occur  in  one  or  more  of  the  other  Gospels, 
such  as  modius,  4.  21;  legio,  5.  9,  15;  denarius,  6.  ^y; 
12.  15;  14.  5;  census,  12.  14;  quadrans,  12.  42;  Hagello, 
15.  15;  and  prceforium,  15.  16.  Some  others  are  found  in 
Mark  alone,  such  as  speculator,  6.  27;  sextarius,  7.  4,  8; 
and  centurio,  15.  39,  44,  45.  This  makes  a  list  of  ten  words 
of  Latin  origin  found  in  this  short  book.  There  are  some 
distinctive  Latin  idioms  in  the  Gospel,  such  as  "to  give 
counsel,"  consilium  dare,  and  "to  be  in  the  last  extremity," 
in  extremis  esse.^'^  Mark  translates  his  account  into  Roman 
expressions  more  than  once,  as  when  he  says  that  the  poor 
widow  cast  in  two  mites  which  make  (in  the  Roman  coin- 
age) a  quadrans,  12.  42;  or,  again,  when  he  tells  us  that  the 
soldiers  led  Jesus  away  within  the  court,  which  is  (called 
by  you  Romans)  the  Prsetorium,  15.  16. 

All  of  these  things  are  indications  that  Mark  was  writing 
in  a  Roman  environment,  and  if  they  are  not  in  themselves 
sufficient  to  prove  that  fact,  they  are  sufficient  to  confirm 
and  establish  the  unanimous  tradition  of  the  early  church  to 
that  effect.  We  find  that  the  Gospel  itself  bears  wit- 
ness to  the  same  truth  which  the  church  Fathers  had  stated, 
namely,  that  the  Gospel  according  to  Mark  is  a  Gospel 
written  especially  for  the  Latin  race.  As  such,  it  makes  its 
appeal  to  those  elements  in  the  life  of  Jesus  which  would 
be  most  attractive  to  the  practical  Roman  mind.  Riggen- 
bach  has  noticed  one  illustration  of  this  truth  when  he  said, 
"As  the  interpreter  of  the  Apostle  of  action,  Mark  de- 
scribes the  Son  of  God  in  the  power  of  His  actions  to  the 
Romans  who  are  the  people  of  action."  ^^  We  turn  next  to 
some  of  the  proofs  of  this  statement. 

*  Credner,  Einleitung,  p.  104. 

*  Leben  Jesu,  ii.  50. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  129 

2.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  the  Strenuous  Life. 

This  Gospel  pictures  Jesus  as  the  tireless  worker  through 
days  of  almost  incredible  toil.  Mark  alone  has  recorded  the 
fact  that  twice  in  his  ministry  neither  Jesus  nor  those  who 
were  working  with  him  had  even  time  to  eat.^^  Something 
is  happening  all  the  time  in  this  narrative.  Mark  helps  us  to 
see  that  Jesus  was  doing  things  as  well  as  saying  things.  He 
is  a  doer  of  deeds  as  well  as  a  teacher  of  truth.  The  first 
Gospel  is  filled  with  discourses,  the  second  Gospel  is  filled 
with  strenuous  performances.  The  Gospel  of  instruction  is 
followed  by  the  Gospel  of  action.  The  Gospel  according  to 
Matthew  was  filled  with  parables  and  preaching;  the  Gospel 
according  to  Mark  is  filled  with  miracles  and  active  min- 
istry. Farrar  says:  "Swift  and  incisive,  Mark's  narrative 
proceeds  straight  to  the  goal  like  a  Roman  soldier  on  his 
march  to  battle.  In  reading  this  Gospel,  carried  away  by 
the  breathless  narrative,  we  feel  like  the  apostles  who  among 
the  press  of  the  people  coming  and  going  had  no  leisure  so 
much  as  to  eat.  Event  after  event  comes  upon  us  in  his 
pages  with  the  impetuous  sequence  of  the  waves  in  a  rising 
tide."  63 

The  Gospel  has  no  introduction,  beyond  the  mere  phrase, 
"The  beginning  of  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of 
God."  Then  straightway  Mark  hastens  into  the  midst  of 
things,  festinat  in  medias  res,  as  Horace  says  of  Homer. 
The  Gospel  has  no  conclusion,  in  the  text  which  has  been 
preserved  to  our  day.  It  breaks  off  as  abruptly  as  it  began, 
at  the  close  of  16.  8.  Some  one  else  has  written  a  conclusion 
and  appended  it  to  the  narrative  of  Mark  at  that  point. 
The  story  is  a  hurried  one  throughout.  It  is  like  the  typical 
romance  in  a  modern  story  paper  in  that  respect.  There  is 
something  new  and  startling  in  every  chapter  and  almost  in 
every  paragraph,  and  at  the  most  exciting  point  the  narra- 
tive abruptly  stops,  and  we  look  for  the  familiar  legend  "To 

"Mark  3.  20;  6.  31. 

**  Messages  of  the  Books,  p.  59. 


130     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

be  continued  in  our  next."  Archbishop  Thomson  says  that 
in  this  Gospel  "the  wonder-working  Son  of  God  sweeps  over 
his  kingdom  swiftly  and  meteorlike."  ^^ 

The  characteristic  word  in  this  Gospel  is  the  Greek  word 
evdvg^  "straightway."  Twice  in  the  Gospel  it  is  repeated 
three  times  in  three  consecutive  verses.  It  occurs  forty- 
two  times  in  Mark,  only  seven  times  in  the  much  longer 
Gospel  according  to  Matthew,  only  three  times  in  John,  and 
only  once  in  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke,  and  only  once  in 
the  book  of  Acts.  Dr.  DaCosta  compared  this  Gospel  to 
Caesar's  Commentaries  and  Mark's  evdvg  to  Caesar's  celeriter. 
The  Authorized  Version  used  seven  words  to  translate 
Mark's  one  word  evdvg  in  different  passages,  "immediately, 
anon,  forthwith,  by  and  by,  as  soon  as,  straightway,  shortly." 
The  Revised  Version  has  rightly  used  one  word  through- 
out.65 

This  narrative  is  like  a  panorama  in  rapid  motion.  We  see 
one  picture  and  straightway  another  takes  its  place,  and  then 
another  and  another,  until  we  might  think  that  the  Master's 
life  was  filled  with  ceaseless  and  incredible  activity.  It  is 
the  Gospel  of  the  strenuous  Hfe.  It  deals  with  only  the 
most  active  portion  of  the  Lord's  ministry  and  with  the 
crowded  events  of  the  closing  week.  It  could  be  sum- 
marized in  the  two  words  used  by  Peter  in  his  sermon  to 
Cornelius  and  his  household,  when  he  said  concerning 
Jesus,  dLr]Xdev  evepyeribvi  and  we  might  paraphrase  those  two 
words  as  follows,  "He  went  through  his  whole  life,  straight 
as  an  arrow  to  its  mark,  with  astonishing  rapidity,  scatter- 
ing the  largess  of  his  good  deeds  with  lavish  hand  and 
with  ceaseless  activity  and  with  boundless  benevolence  all 
along  the  way.  He  went  through  the  land  and  he  went 
through  life,  doing  good  all  the  time."  ^^ 

"*  Speaker's  Commentary,  vol.  i,  p.  xxxv. 

"■* Notice  its  recurrence  eleven  times  in  the  first  chapter:  i.  lO, 

12,   l8,  20,  21,  23,  28,  29,  30,  42,  43. 

""Acts  10.  38. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  131 

However,  Mark  would  not  have  us  believe  that  the  Master 
had  no  need  of  rest  and  recuperation  in  the  swirl  of  his 
ministerial  activity.  Mark  emphasizes  that  need  more  fully 
than  any  other  of  the  evangelists. 

3.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Repeated  Retirements  from  ac- 
tive and  public  life. 

"It  is  an  interesting  feature  to  which  Dr.  Lange  first  has 
directed  attention,  that  Mark  lays  emphasis  on  the  periods 
of  pause  and  rest  which  rhythmically  intervene  between  the 
several  great  victories  achieved  by  Christ.  He  came  out 
from  his  obscure  abode  in  Nazareth ;  each  fresh  advance  in 
his  public  life  is  preceded  by  a  retirement,  and  each  retire- 
ment is  followed  by  a  new  and  greater  victory.  The  contrast 
between  the  contemplative  rest  and  the  vigorous  action  is 
striking  and  explains  the  overpowering  effect  by  revealing 
its  secret  spring  in  the  communion  with  God  and  with  him- 
self. Thus  we  have  after  his  baptism  a  retirement  to  the 
wilderness  in  Judaea  before  he  preached  in  Galilee,  i.  12;  a 
retirement  to  the  ship,  3.  7;  to  the  desert  on  the  eastern 
shore  of  the  lake  of  Galilee,  6.  31 ;  to  a  mountain,  6.  46;  to 
the  border  land  of  Tyre  and  Sidon,  7.  24;  to  Decapolis,  7. 
31 ;  to  a  high  mountain,  9.  2;  to  Bethany,  11.  i ;  to  Geth- 
semane,  14.  34 ;  his  rest  in  the  grave  before  the  resurrection, 
and  his  withdrawal  from  the  world  and  his  reappearance  in 
the  victories  of  the  gospel  preached  by  his  disciples.  The 
ascension  of  the  Lord  forms  his  last  withdrawal,  which  is  to 
be  followed  by  his  final  onset  and  absolute  victory."  ^"^ 

If  Mark  shows  Jesus  living  the  strenuous  life  to  the  last 
degree,  he  shows  him  sensible  enough  to  take  frequent 
respites  or  vacations.  Jesus  fled  publicity.  He  feared 
the  overstrain.  The  healing  ministry  taxed  his  strength. 
Virtue  went  out  of  him  in  his  constant  contact  with  the 
sick  and  the  suffering;  and  after  a  steady  siege  of  it  for 
hours  and  days  he  was  physically  weakened  and  mentally 
barren  and  spiritually  exhausted.    Constant  association  with 

"  SchaflF,  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  vol.  i,  p.  635. 


132     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

the  sick  and  the  constant  sight  of  the  deformed  and  the 
mutilated  told  upon  his  nervous  system  at  last.  The  teach- 
ing ministry  was  only  less  taxing  than  the  other.  Heart  and 
brain  were  wholly  engaged  in  the  work,  and  he  came  again 
and  again  to  the  verge  of  nervous  collapse.  He  was  so 
weary  sometimes  that  in  the  very  first  moment  of  quiet  he 
had  he  fell  into  the  very  depths  of  sleep,  and  he  slept  so 
soundly  that  the  tempest's  fury  did  not  waken  him.  He 
was  so  weary  sometimes  that  he  fled  secretly  to  escape  the 
further  strain.  When  all  the  city  was  gathered  at  his  door 
at  sunset,  he  got  up  the  next  morning  before  sunrise  and 
departed  into  a  desert  place.^^  When  the  cities  were  mak- 
ing him  notorious  he  remained  "without  in  desert  places."  ^^ 
He  liked  to  be  alone  some  of  the  time.  He  liked  to  take  his 
disciples  apart  by  themselves."*'  When  the  people  sought  him 
most,  he  sought  solitude  most  earnestly. 

Is  this  the  Gospel  of  the  strenuous  life?  It  is;  and 
nevertheless  in  this  Gospel  Jesus  seems  almost  constantly 
to  be  getting  away,  withdrawing  to  desert  places,  to  Tyre 
and  Sidon,  to  Caesarea  Philippi,  to  Bethany,  to  heaven. 
Hie  longs  to  go  apart  with  his  disciples  and  with  his  God. 
He  retires  sometimes  to  escape  from  his  foes.'^^  He  retires 
sometimes  to  escape  from  his  friends.'^^  He  retires  some- 
times to  escape  to  his  God,  to  refresh  his  soul  in  prayer  and 
communion  with  the  Father  before  attempting  any  further 
work.''^^  He  constantly  was  recruiting  his  exhausted  powers. 
He  constantly  was  guarding  against  danger  from  enemies 
and  from  overwork.  His  strenuous  life  was  made  possible 
by  his  frequent  withdrawals  for  recuperation  and  rest.  It 
was  after  these  withdrawals  that  he  was  most  efficient  again. 


"Mark  i.  35. 

"  Mark  i.  45. 

"*  Mark  6.  31 ;  9.  2. 

''Mark  6.  6;  6.  30;  7.  24;  11.  19. 

'^Mark  i.  35;  11.  ll. 

"Mark  i.  35. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  133 

Each  retirement  only  made  ready  for  renewed  wonders  of 
healing  and  teaching  power. 

Does  Mark  crowd  these  wonders  upon  us,  and  fill  his 
pages  with  them  ?  He  does ;  and  at  the  same  time  he  tells  us 
of  eight  occasions  in  the  space  of  nine  chapters  when  Jesus 
sought  the  solitudes  that  he  might  meditate  and  rest  and  pray 
in  peace.  Jesus  lived  the  strenuous  life,  but  he  lived  it 
sanely  and  well.  He  did  not  allow  himself  to  be  worn  to 
a  frazzle.  He  would  have  considered  it  a  sin  against  his 
body,  which  was  a  temple  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  against 
his  nerves,  which  must  be  kept  always  fit  for  sympathetic 
and  sufficient  ministry,  and  against  his  brain,  which  could 
be  a  flawless  channel  for  divine  truth  only  as  it  maintained 
its  perfect  condition.  The  Perfect  Man  probably  had  a  per- 
fect physique,  and  he  took  care  of  it  to  the  best  of  his  ability, 
as  any  Perfect  Servant  of  God  and  of  man  must  do. 

He  was  ready  to  sacrifice  his  strength  and  his  sleep,  his 
leisure  and  even  his  food  to  meet  the  demands  of  pressing 
need;  but  when  he  came  to  the  point  where  he  knew  that 
for  effective  future  ministry  the  present  strenuous  ministry 
must  stop  for  a  while,  he  got  away  from  that  place,  he  fled 
to  the  desert  solitude  or  to  the  mountaintop,  he  withdrew 
until  his  mind  was  at  rest  and  his  nerves  had  righted  again 
and  his  physical  strength  was  restored.  Sleep  and  prayer 
would  set  him  straight  in  a  little  while.  Sometimes  he 
seemed  to  prefer  prayer  to  sleep,  and  he  prayed  all  the 
night  through.  Sometimes  doubtless  he  preferred  sleep 
to  prayer,  and  sleep  did  for  him  what  prayer  could  not  have 
done.  In  communion  with  nature,  in  communion  with  God, 
in  communion  with  his  own  soul,  in  communion  with  the  dis- 
ciple band  Jesus  maintained  his  spiritual  equanimity  always, 
and  his  physical  and  mental  and  nervous  powers  speedily 
returned  to  normal  control.  The  Gospel  of  the  Strenuous 
Life  is  just  as  clearly  the  Gospel  of  Rest  and  Recreation. 

4.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Vivid  Description. 

"Ewald  characterizes  Mark's  style  as  the  Schmels  der 


134     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

frischen  Blume,  as  the  voile,  reine  Lcben  der  stoffe,  Kahnis 
as  drastisch  and  frappant,  Meyer  as  malerisch  anschaiilich. 
Lange  speaks  of  the  enthusiasm  and  vividness  of  realization 
which  accounts  for  the  brevity,  rapidity,  and  somewhat 
dramatic  tone  of  the  narrative,  and  the  introduction  of  de- 
tails which  give  life  to  the  scene."  '*  Mark  was  the  D wight 
L.  Moody  of  the  apostolic  age.  He  was  simple  and  direct  in 
his  style.  He  was  radical  and  forcible  in  all  he  had  to  say. 
Always  brief  and  to  the  point,  he  was  full  of  blunt  speech 
for  the  ordinary,  practical  man.  Like  Bengel,  he  had  the 
faculty  of  compressing  a  deal  of  matter  into  small  space. 
He  usually  packs  his  thought  into  briefest  compass.  There 
is  very  little  of  logic  and  less  of  philosophy  in  the  second 
Gospel.  It  is  a  record  of  impressions  and  of  emotions  such 
as  Peter  would  be  likely  to  experience  and  to  remember, 
and  such  as  Mark,  who  seems  to  have  been  much  like  Peter 
in  his  personal  character,  would  most  appreciate,  and  such 
as  would  appeal  most  forcibly  to  the  practical  Roman  mind. 

Mark  is  a  most  effective  story-teller.  We  see  the  things 
he  talks  about.  They  impress  us  more  sharply  and  they 
seem  to  have  more  definite  outlines  than  the  corresponding 
passages  in  the  other  evangelists.  Mark  is  the  first  of  the 
realists,  using  that  word  in  its  best  sense.  We  feel  that  he 
is  telling  us  things  just  as  they  are,  without  toning  them 
down  or  touching  them  up  in  the  least  degree.  When  he 
differs  with  the  other  synoptics  we  feel  that  he  is  truer  to 
life  than  they  are.  There  is  no  reticence  or  reservation  in 
his  account.  He  speaks  out  the  blunt  truth  of  the  matter, 
and  for  that  reason  we  value  him  most. 

Some  think  that  John  has  given  us  a  life  of  Christ  colored 
somewhat  in  its  picturing  by  metaphysical  and  philosophical 
postulates.  Some  think  that  Matthew's  life  of  Christ  is 
dominated  more  or  less  with  Jewish  and  dogmatic  interests, 
and  that  his  material  is  manipulated  more  or  less  in  order 


"  Schaff,  op  cit.,  p.  636. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  135 

to  prove  clearly  that  Jesus  was  the  true  and  only  Messiah, 
Some  think  that  Luke's  life  of  Christ  has  the  universal- 
istic  outlook  of  the  Pauline  theology,  and  that  it  is  built 
up  on  the  Pauline  presuppositions.  Mark  has  given  us  not 
a  metaphysical  nor  Messianic  nor  theological  Christ,  but  the 
historical  Jesus,  the  real  Jesus.  It  is  for  that  reason  that 
we  call  Mark  the  first  of  the  realists  in  Christian  literature. 
He  gives  us  a  realistic  picture  of  the  events  of  the  Gospel 
history.  His  narratives  have  the  accuracy  of  photographic 
reproductions.  They  stand  out  before  us,  clear  in  every 
detail. 

Hippolytus  calls  Mark  "Mark  the  stump-fingered, 
Mdp/co?  6  KoXoPoddKTvXog."  Zahn  says,  "It  is  possible  that 
KoXofioddKTvXog  was  originally  applied  as  an  epithet  to  Mark 
because  of  a  congenital  shortness  of  the  fingers  or  a  finger, 
which  was  noticeable"  "^^  to  all ;  but  Tregelles  and  others 
think  that  that  name  was  given  to  Mark  because  he  was  a 
deserter.  When  a  soldier  cut  ofif  his  thumb  or  otherwise 
mutilated  his  hand  to  escape  from  military  service,  he  be- 
came stump-fingered  and  at  the  same  time  a  coward  and 
poltroon.  Mark  deserved  the  name  because  he  deserted 
Barnabas  and  Paul.  There  was  a  late  legend  found  in  the 
preface  to  the  Vulgate  and  other  Latin  editions  of  the  Gos- 
pels which  said  that  Mark  had  literally  mutilated  himself  in 
order  to  escape  the  responsibilities  of  the  priesthood.  We 
already  have  suggested  that  Mark  may  have  had  a  personal 
deformity,  which  may  have  been  caused  by  an  accident  with 
a  heavy  hammer,  and  that  that  would  account  for  both  of 
the  names,  "Mark  the  Hammer"  and  "Mark  the  Stump- 
fingered."  We  mention  this  title  at  the  present  point  be- 
cause Keim  has  thought  that  it  referred  not  to  any  actual 
deformity  but  only  to  the  cropped  and  curtailed  character 
of  Mark's  style.  The  second  Gospel  is  brief;  its  speech  is 
blunt.     There  is  nothing  subdued  or  restrained  about  it. 


'  Zahn,  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  p.  446. 


136     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

That  adds  to  its  impressiveness.  We  rather  think  that  the 
title  found  in  Hippolytus  preserves  a  tradition  concerning 
a  real  fact.  We  question  whether  it  has  anything  to  do  with 
Mark's  style. 

We  note  some  of  the  particular  characteristics  of  the 
second  Gospel  which  help  to  make  it  the  Gospel  of  Vivid 
Description. 

( 1 )  Mark  usually  prefers  the  present  tense,  and  he  repre- 
sents the  action  as  taking  place  before  us.  Matthew  in  the 
parallel  accounts  changes  the  tenses  again  and  again  from 
the  present  into  the  past.  Compare  i.  40  with  Matt.  8.  2, 
and  14.  43  with  Matt.  26.  47.  There  are  one  hundred  and 
fifty-one  historic  presents  in  Mark,  and  of  these  Matthew 
retains  only  twenty-one. 

(2)  Mark  has  the  imperfect  tense  two  hundred  and  eigh- 
teen times,  and  Matthew  avoids  this  tense  in  his  parallels 
by  omission  and  by  paraphrase  one  hundred  and  eighty- 
seven  times,  and  thirty-one  times  he  changes  it  outright  into 
the  aorist. 

(3)  Mark  delights  to  note  the  beginning  of  an  action 
and  he  uses  the  verb  tIq^oto  twenty-six  times :  he  began  to 
teach,  he  began  to  preach,  he  began  to  speak,  he  began  to 
rebuke,  he  began  to  cry  aloud,  and  so  on,  i.  45 ;  4.  i ;  10.  28; 
10.  41 ;  10.  47.  The  disciples  began  to  make  a  way  through 
the  field  when  the  Pharisees  objected,  2.  23.  In  only  six 
of  these  cases  does  Matthew  retain  the  verb  to  begin. 

(4)  Mark  seems  to  have  a  liking  for  diminutives.  He 
uses  the  Greek  terms  for  little  daughter,  little  dog,  little 
ear,  little  child,  little  boat,  little  fish,  where  the  other  evan- 
gelists do  not  have  the  diminutive. 

(5)  Mark  is  fond  of  strong  expressions.  He  has  ac- 
cumulated negatives:  i.  44;  2.  2;  3.  20;  3.  27.  He  uses  the 
exaggerated  ""a?,  "all,"  for  many  or  a  large  number,  1.5; 
I.  37;  2.  13.  He  has  the  word  ttoXv^  forty-three  times  and 
the  adverb  ttoXXo,  fifteen  times. 

(6)  Mark  elaborates,  repeats,  adds  word  to  word  and 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  137 

phrase  to  phrase  to  make  his  descriptions  vivid,  adequate, 
full.  He  says  that  the  leper  who  was  healed  went  forth  and 
began  to  publish  it  much  and  to  blase  abroad  the  matterJ^ 
He  says  that  the  good  seed,  springing  up  and  increasing, 
was  bringing  forth.'^'^  He  tells  how  Peter  denied  saying,  "I 
neither  know,  nor  Jinderstand  what  thou  sayest."  "^^ 

(7)  Mark  gives  us  details  of  person,  number,  time,  and 
place  which  are  not  paralleled  in  the  other  Gospels.  He 
says  that  the  disciples  had  only  one  loaf  with  them  in  the 
boat.'''*  He  tells  us  that  Peter  and  James  and  John  and 
Andrew  were  the  disciples  who  asked  about  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  and  that  they  were  sitting  on  the  mountain 
over  against  the  temple  when  they  did  it.^*^  He  tells  us  that 
Jesus  sent  out  the  twelve  two  by  two.^^  He  tells  us  just 
where  Jesus  was  sitting  when  he  saw  the  widow  put  her 
mites  into  the  treasury.82  He  alone  notes  the  fact  that 
Jesus  was  ivith  the  wild  beasts  in  the  wilderness.^^  He 
mentions  the  pillow  in  the  boat.^*  Every  added  fact  and 
phrase  of  this  kind  is  invaluable  to  us,  as  throwing  new  light 
upon  the  life  of  our  Lord.  Mark  is  careful  to  preserve  the 
very  syllables  which  Christ  has  uttered  on  certain  occa- 
sions.S!^  He  has  certain  names  which  do  not  occur  in  any 
other  Gospel,  as  Alphaeus,  Jairus,  Bartimaeus,  Salome,  Alex- 
ander and  Rufus.8® 

(8)  Mark  gives  us  the  looks  and  the  emotions,  the  actions 
and  the  gestures  of  the  Lord  and  his  apostles.    He  tells  us 


"Mark  I. 

45- 

"  Mark  4. 

8. 

"Mark  14 

.  68. 

"  Mark  8. 

14. 

""  Mark  13 

•  3,  4- 

"  Mark  6. 

7. 

"Mark  12 

.  41- 

"Mark  I. 

13- 

"  Mark  4. 

38. 

"  Mark  5. 

41;  7- 

34 

••  Mark  2. 

14;  5- 

22 

10.  51 ;  14.  36. 

10.  46;  15.  40;  15.  21. 


138     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

that  Jesus  looked  about  with  anger.s?  pje  tells  us  that  the 
Master  was  filled  with  indignation  when  the  disciples  were 
turning  the  little  children  away.^^  He  wondered  at  the  un- 
belief of  the  people.89  He  loved  the  rich  young  ruler.9<> 
He  was  astonished  at  the  agony  in  the  garden  of  Gethsem- 
ane.^^  The  Jesus  pictured  by  Mark  is  a  man  with  all  the 
emotions  of  other  men.  He  has  deep  compassion  for  the 
multitude  that  is  as  sheep  without  a  shepherd.^^  jje  sighs 
deeply  when  his  hearers  demand  a  visible  and  heavenly 
sign.93  He  walks  with  an  air  of  tragedy  about  him  on  the 
way  to  Jerusalem.^*  He  dominates  the  whole  situation  with 
the  intensity  of  his  zeal  as  he  overturns  the  tables  in  the 
temple.^^  Mark  has  a  multitude  of  pictorial  participles, 
setting  forth  these  looks  and  gestures  of  the  actors  in  his 
narrative,  such  as  ''looking  up,  looking  around,  springing 
up,  stooping  down,  speaking  indignantly,  turning  around, 
groaning." 

Actions  speak  louder  than  words  oftentimes  in  this  Gos- 
pel, as  in  3.  5;  10.  14;  10.  21.  Note  all  the  particulars 
found  in  Mark  alone  of  the  method  of  the  cure  of  the  deaf 
and  dumb  man  in  7.  33 :  "He  took  him  aside  from  the  multi- 
tude privately,  and  put  his  fingers  into  his  ears,  and  he  spat, 
and  touched  his  tongue;  and  looking  up  to  heaven,  he 
sighed";  and  then,  only  after  all  these  preliminaries,  he 
spoke  the  wonder-working  word,  "Ephphatha!"  Mark  is 
the  only  one  who  tells  us  that  the  rich  young  ruler  ran  to 
Jesus  and  kneeled  before  him,  as  he  asked  his  question  con- 
cerning eternal  life,^^  and  Mark  alone  tells  us  how  the  young 
man's  countenance  fell  at  the  Lord's  reply.^^  Mark  alone 
tells  us  that,  when  Jesus  called  Bartimasus  to  him,  the  blind 


"Mark  3.  S.  '"Marks.  12. 

'"  Mark  10.  14.  "  Mark  10.  32. 

"'Mark  6.  6.  '"Mark  11.  15. 

»o  Mark  10.  21.  ""  Mark  10.  17. 

"  Mark  14.  33.  "  Mark  lO.  22. 
•"  Mark  6.  34. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  139 

man  cast  away  his  garment  and  sprang  up  and  came  to 
Jesus.^s  Mark  alone  shows  us  the  high  priest,  springing 
to  his  feet  and  striding  forth  into  the  midst  of  the  assembly, 
expressing  by  his  action  as  well  as  by  his  word  the  indigna- 
tion he  felt  toward  Jesus.^^  These  expressive  gestures  and 
actions  give  to  the  narrative  a  graphic  and  dramatic  char- 
acter which  is  all  its  own. 

(9)  Mark  makes  us  see  just  as  clearly  the  effect  produced 
upon  the  people  by  the  words  and  works  of  Jesus.  We  have 
glimpses  of  the  throngs  which  pressed  upon  him  and  de- 
manded his  time  and  attention  till  he  had  no  chance  to  eat. 
There  was  no  room  even  about  the  doors,  we  are  told. 
There  were  so  many  people  upon  the  shore  that  Jesus  was 
compelled  to  enter  a  boat  and  put  off  a  little  from  the  beach 
that  he  might  escape  the  crowding  and  that  all  might  see 
and  hear.  Sometimes  those  who  listen  are  filled  with  awe 
and  wonder,ioo  and  sometimes  those  who  look  on  are  amazed 
and  begin  to  fear.^^i 

(10)  There  is  an  objective  and  photographic  character 
about  these  accounts  which  makes  them  the  main  source  of 
all  artistic  and  dramatic  details  in  modern  reproductions. 
The  artists  and  the  preachers  go  to  Mark  to  get  the  graphic 
touches  which  make  these  scenes  life-like  and  real.  They 
seem  to  be  the  accounts  of  an  eyewitness,  and  they  appeal 
to  the  eye  to-day.  Streeter  calls  them  "a  collection  of 
vignettes — scenes  from  the  Life  of  the  Master,"  ^^^  and 
Farrar  says  of  them:  "They  are  painted  as  it  were  from 
the  photograph  of  them  on  Peter's  memory.  Jesus  'looks 
round'  on  the  worshipers.  He  'takes  the  little  children  in 
his  arms,'  and  (how  mothers  will  thank  Mark  for  that  de- 
tail!)'lays  his  hand  on  them  and  blesses  them.'   .    .    .   Take 

•*Mark  10.  50. 

••Mark  14.  60. 

'"Mark  i.  22,  27;  2.  12;  6.  2. 

""  Mark  4.  41 ;  6.  51 ;  10.  24,  26,  32. 

""Oxford  Studies  in  the  Synoptic  Problem,  p.  220. 


140     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

by  way  of  example  the  description  of  the  storm  upon  the 
lake.  In  Mark  alone  do  we  see  the  waves  breaking  over 
and  half  swamping  the  little  ship.  In  Mark  alone  do  we 
see  Jesus  in  his  utter  weariness  sleeping  on  the  leather 
cushion  of  the  steersman  at  the  stern. 

"Take  another  scene,  the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand. 
Mark  alone  tells  us  of  the  fresh,  green  grass  on  which  they 
sat  down  by  hundreds  and  by  fifties ;  and  the  word  which  he 
uses  for  'companies'  means  hterally  'flowerbeds,'  as  though 
to  Peter  those  multitudes,  in  their  festal  passover  attire, 
with  its  many-colored  Oriental  brightness  of  red  and  blue, 
looked  like  the  patches  of  crocus  and  poppy  and  tulip  and 
amaryllis  which  he  had  seen  upon  the  mountain  slopes. 
Again,  in  the  narrative  of  the  transfiguration,  it  is  in  Mark 
that  we  see  most  clearly  the  dazzling  robes  of  the  trans- 
figured Lord  as  they  shed  their  golden  luster  over  Hermon's 
snow;  and  it  is  Mark  who  shows  us  most  vividly  the  con- 
trast of  that  scene  of  peace  and  radiance  with  the  tumult 
and  agitation  of  the  crowd  below — the  father's  heartrend- 
ing anguish  at  the  foaming  and  convulsion  of  the  agonized 
demoniac  boy,  the  trouble  of  the  disciples,  and  the  noble 
passions  of  the  Lord.  As  you  gaze  on  Raphael's  immortal 
picture  of  the  transfiguration,  you  will  see  at  once  that  it  is 
from  the  narrative  of  Mark  that  it  derives  most  of  its 
intensity,  its  movement,  its  coloring,  its  contrast,  and  its 
power.  It  is  these  gifts  of  the  evangelist  which  make  one 
writer  say  of  him  that  he  'wears  a  richly  embroidered  gar- 
ment'; and  another — thinking  of  his  bright  independence 
and  originality — that  in  his  Gospel  we  breathe  'a  scent  as  of 
fresh  flowers.'  "  ^^^  Fresh  flowers !  That  is  why  we  value 
the  second  Gospel  so  highly.  It  was  the  first  to  be  written, 
and  there  is  a  freshness  about  it  which  is  unrivaled  in  any 
of  the  others. 

5.  This  is  The  Disciple  Gospel. 

***  Farrar,  op  cit.,  pp.  60,  61. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  141 

Weiss  thinks  that  this  Gospel  might  properly  be  called  by 
this  name.^^'*  He  points  out  that  much  of  its  contents  has 
to  do  with  the  external  history  and  the  inner  development  of 
the  disciples,  and  a  disproportionate  number  of  the  stories 
concern  the  disciples  and  a  whole  series  of  its  statements 
emanate  from  the  inner  circle  of  the  chosen  three.^^^  This  is 
all  true.  Jesus  cares  for  his  more  immediate  disciples  and 
sees  that  they  have  their  proper  rest/"^  and  gives  them  their 
needed  instruction  as  they  seem  able  to  bear  it.*®*^  Again 
and  again  he  has  to  chide  them  and  discipline  them.  They 
seem  almost  incredibly  stupid  and  dull  of  hearing  and  hard 
of  heart.  Jesus  rebukes  them  for  their  slowness  to  perceive 
his  meaning,^'^^  and  for  their  niggardliness  of  reverence  and 
love.^^^  They  follow  in  fear  and  amazement  behind  him 
at  times.*^*^  They  flee  and  leave  him  at  the  mercy  of  his 
foes  at  the  last.^^^ 

It  is  not  a  very  pleasing  picture  of  the  disciples  which 
Mark  gives  us.  Possibly  that  is  because  it  is  true  to  the 
life,  and  the  disciples  were  not  such  immaculate  characters 
as  the  reverence  of  later  times  has  been  prone  to  consider 
them.  They  were  disciples,  but  they  were  not  saints  as  yet. 
Among  the  disciples  Peter  is  the  most  prominent  figure  in 
this  Gospel,  and  these  intimate  reminiscences  of  the  dis- 
ciple band  in  all  probability  came  originally  from  him. 

6.  This  is  Peter's  Gospel. 

All  that  we  have  said  about  the  Gospel  of  Vivid  Descrip- 
tion bears  its  testimony  to  this  fact.  We  have  in  this  Gospel 
the  narratives  of  an  eyewitness,  and  we  have  no  reason  to 


"**  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  vol.  ii,  p.  241. 

""  Weiss,  op.  cit.,  ii,  257. 

'-  Mark  6.  31. 

"^Mark  I.  38;  8.  31. 

'-  Mark  8.  17. 

»*  Mark  14.  6. 

"•  Mark  ID.  32. 

"'  Mark  14.  50. 


142     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

think  that  Mark  himself  was  an  eyewitness.  He  merely  has 
recorded  what  Peter  said  in  his  preaching.  Almost  all  the 
contents  of  this  Gospel  might  rest  upon  the  personal  knowl- 
edge of  Peter. 

(i)  It  begins  where  Peter's  own  recollections  begin,  not 
with  the  preexistence  of  Jesus,  as  in  the  fourth  Gospel,  and 
not  with  the  stories  of  annunciation  and  of  the  birth  of 
Jesus,  as  in  the  first  and  the  third  Gospels,  but  with  the 
preaching  of  John  the  Baptist,  which  Peter  himself  had 
heard,  and  the  baptism  of  Jesus,  which  he  may  have  seen. 

(2)  The  first  thing  narrated  in  the  account  of  the  active 

ministry  of  Jesus  is  the  call  of  Peter  and  Andrew  his 
brother.112 

(3)  The  whole  of  the  first  part  of  Christ's  ministry 
centers  in  the  first  visit  of  the  Master  to  Peter's  home ;  and 
in  Mark  alone  we  are  told  that  his  home  was  occupied  by 
the  two  brothers,  Peter  and  Andrew,  together.  ^^^  Luke  and 
Matthew  mention  Simon  alone  in  this  connection.  It 
was  a  very  strenuous  day  which  Jesus  spent  there  at  Caper- 
naum, and  all  the  city  was  gathered  about  the  door  in  the 
evening.  The  next  morning,  a  great  while  before  day,  Jesus 
slipped  away  to  recruit  his  physical  and  spiritual  powers  in 
prayer.  There  must  have  been  something  of  a  feeling  of 
consternation  among  the  people  when  they  learned  that  Jesus 
was  gone.  It  was  Peter  who  with  characteristic  promptness 
organized  a  searching  party  and  went  forth  at  the  head  of 
it  to  find  the  missing  Master.  It  is  in  Mark  alone  that  the 
name  of  Simon  is  mentioned  in  this  connection.*^^ 

(4)  Peter's  great  confession  is  the  climax  of  this  Gos- 
pel.115 

(5)  The  Gospel  closes  with  the  command  of  the  angel  to 
the  women,  "Go,  tell  his  disciples  and  Peter,  He  goeth  be- 

'"Mark  I.   16. 
"^Mark  i.  29-32. 
"*  Mark  I.  36. 
"'  Mark  8.  28. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  143 

fore  you  into  Galilee:  there  shall  ye  see  him,  as  he  said 
unto  you.ii^ 

(6)  Here  alone  do  we  read  that  it  was  Peter  who  called 
the  Lord's  attention  to  the  fig  tree  withered  away  from  the 
roots,!!'^  and  there  are  many  other  such  allusions  and  inci- 
dents recorded  as  indicate  the  presence  and  the  remem- 
brance of  Peter  himself. 

(7)  The  program  of  the  second  Gospel  is  given  in  Peter's 
summary  of  the  apostolic  preaching  as  he  outlined  it  to 
Cornelius.118  This  sermon  of  Peter  to  Cornelius  has  been 
called  the  Gospel  of  Mark  in  a  nutshell.ii^  A  still  shorter 
summary  of  its  contents  can  be  found  in  the  beginning  of 
Peter's  sermon  at  Pentecost.^^o  Another  statement,  short- 
est of  all,  is  contained  in  Peter's  declaration  of  the  neces- 
sities of  apostolic  testimony  made  in  the  upper  room.^^i 

(8)  The  whole  Gospel  is  filled  with  the  Petrine  spirit. 
All  the  energy  of  Peter  is  manifest  in  its  hurried  narrative. 
All  the  objective  and  impulsive  and  comparatively  superficial 
observations  of  Peter  are  in  evidence  here.  His  vivid 
impressions  and  his  practical  interests  are  apparent  on  every 
page.  In  the  stilling  of  the  storm  upon  the  lake  Matthew 
and  Luke  simply  record  the  fact  that  Jesus  rebuked  the 
raging  of  the  wind,  and  there  was  a  great  calm,  but  Mark 
preserves  the  very  words  of  the  Master.  He  spoke  to  the 
wind  and  said,  "Be  silent!"  and  its  raging  ceased  at  the 
word.  Then  he  turned  to  the  sea  and  said,  "Be  muzzled !" 
and  its  roaring  was  cut  off  at  once.  Those  were  strange 
terms  to  be  applied  in  this  way.  Jesus  spoke  to  the  wind 
as  if  it  were  a  personality,  and  could  hear  and  obey.  He 
spoke  to  the  sea  as  if  it  were  a  sea-monster  or  as  he  spoke 
on  another  occasion  to  a  demon,i22  ^s  if  it  had  a  mouth 
which  could  be  muzzled  and  this  were  the  best  method  to 


"'Mark  16.  7.  ""Acts  2,  22-24. 

"^Mark  11.  21.  "*Acts  i.  2,2. 

"®Acts  10.  36-40.  ""Mark  I.  25. 
"» Schaff,  op.  cit.,  p.  633. 


144     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

put  an  end  to  its  noise.  They  were  strange  terms,  not  to  be 
forgotten  by  anyone  who  had  heard  them.  They  made  their 
vivid  impression  upon  Peter  and  he  has  given  them  to  Mark. 

Take  one  of  the  miracles  recorded  by  Mark  alone,  and 
notice  the  dramatic  impressiveness  of  its  recital.  Jesus 
takes  the  Wind  man  by  the  hand  and  leads  him  outside  the 
village.  There  he  makes  spittle  and  puts  it  upon  the  blind 
man's  eyes.  Then  he  lays  his  hands  upon  the  blind  man's 
head,  and  asks  him,  "Do  you  see  anything?"  For  the  first 
time  in  his  life,  it  may  be,  the  blind  man  looks,  and  we  can 
almost  see  the  eager  expectation  in  his  countenance  and  we 
can  almost  hear  his  awe-struck  ejaculations  as  the  reality  of 
the  miracle  dawns  upon  him.  "I  see  men!  .  .  .  I  see 
them  as  trees  standing  straight  and  still !  .  .  .  No,  now  I 
see  them  moving !  .  .  .  They  are  walking !"  Then  Jesus 
laid  his  hands  upon  the  blind  man's  eyes,  and  the  man  looked 
steadfastly,  and  to  his  straining  vision  all  things  became 
clear.  Peter  had  watched  the  whole  transaction  closely, 
and  it  is  his  clear  memory  of  it  which  Mark  has  recorded.^^s 

(9)  Eusebiusi24  pointed  out  the  fact  that  Peter  in  his 
preaching  omitted  many  things  in  the  gospel  narrative  which 
reflected  credit  upon  himself,  and  that  in  consequence  these 
things  were  not  found  in  the  second  Gospel,  (a)  We  are  not 
told  in  this  Gospel  that  Peter  walked  upon  the  sea.  That 
surely  was  one  of  the  most  wonderful  things  which  ever 
happened  in  a  human  Ufe,  and  it  is  not  mentioned  here. 
(&)  At  the  time  of  the  great  confession  we  are  not  told  in 
this  Gospel  that  the  Master  pronounced  Peter  blessed  as  one 
to  whom  the  Father  had  made  special  revelation;  and  we 
do  not  read  that  Peter  was  called  the  rock  upon  which 
Christ  would  build  his  church,  (c)  Peter  was  one  of  the 
two  chosen  disciples  who  were  sent  to  make  the  prepara- 
tions for  the  Last  Supper.  Luke  tells  us  that  fact,  but 
Mark  does  not  mention  Peter's  name  at  this  point. 

'"  Mark  8.  22-26. 

"*  Demon.  Evang.,  iii,  5. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  145 

(d)  Luke  tells  us  of  another  singling  out  of  Peter  for 
the  Master's  especial  solicitude  and  prayer.  Jesus  said  to 
Peter  directly,  "Simon,  Simon,  behold,  Satan  desired  to 
have  all  of  you  apostles,  that  he  might  sift  all  of  you  as 
wheat:  but  I  made  supplication  for  thee,  Simon,  that  thy 
faith  may  fail  not ;  and  do  thou,  when  thou  hast  turned  again, 
and  become  steadfast,  strengthen  and  establish  all  the  breth- 
ren." ^25  It  was  a  most  noteworthy  honor  bestowed  upon 
Peter,  that  such  special  supplication  should  be  made  for 
him  and  that  such  a  responsibility  for  all  his  brethren  should 
be  laid  upon  him.  Mark  omits  all  mention  of  it.  (e)  We 
learn  from  John  that  Peter  was  the  disciple  who  drew  his 
sword  at  the  time  of  the  arrest  of  Jesus  and  struck  at  the 
high  priest's  servant. ^^6  j^  ^as  a  foolish  thing  to  do,  but 
it  was  an  evidence  of  Peter's  courage  and  loyalty;  and  his 
name  is  not  mentioned  in  this  narrative  in  Mark.  (/) 
According  to  the  other  Gospels,  Peter  was  the  first  of 
the  apostles  to  see  the  risen  Lord;  but  we  never  would 
have  learned  that  fact  from  Mark's  record.  On  the  con- 
trary, we  are  explicitly  told  in  the  appendix  to  this  Gospel 
that  Mary  Magdalene  was  the  first  who  saw  Jesus  after 
the  resurrection. 

(10)  The  second  Gospel  not  only  omits  certain  things 
which  might  have  reflected  honor  upon  Peter,  but  it  seems 
to  be  careful  to  record  certain  things  which  were  calculated 
to  humble  him.  (a)  When  Peter  reasoned  with  Jesus  that 
he  ought  not  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem  to  suffer  and  die,  we 
read  here  alone  that  Jesus  turned  about  and  saw  that  the 
disciples  were  all  observant  and  listening,  and  then  he 
rebuked  Peter  and  said,  "Get  thee  behind  me,  Satan;  for 
thou  mindest  not  the  things  of  God,  but  the  things  of 
men."  ^2?  The  record  in  Mark  makes  it  evident  that  it  was 
a  public  and  most  scathing  humiliation.     (6)  On  the  mount 

'''Luke  22.  31,  32. 
"•John  18.  10. 
^  Mark  8.  33- 


146     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

of  transfiguration  when  Peter  said,  "Let  us  build  three 
tabernacles  here,"  Mark  explains  that  utterly  foolish  speech 
by  the  statement,  "He  knew  not  what  to  say."  ^^s  Most 
people  would  have  kept  silent  under  such  circumstances; 
but  Peter  always  talked  whether  he  knew  what  to  say  or 
not.  He  always  was  inclined  to  say  something  whether 
wise  or  otherwise.  In  this  case  he  concluded  afterward 
that  he  had  been  far  from  wise  in  his  speech.  Morison 
represents  him  as  saying,  "I  thought  I  should  say  some- 
thing ;  but  really  I  did  not  know  what  to  say,  I  was  so  con- 
founded and  overwhelmed  with  awe.  In  the  end  I  actually 
said  something  foolish."  129  (c)  In  the  Gethsemane  scene 
this  Gospel  singles  Peter  out  for  especial  rebuke.  When 
the  Master  came  and  found  them  sleeping  he  said  unto 
Peter,  "Simon,  sleepest  thou?  couldest  thou  not  watch  one 
hour?"  130  (c?)  The  account  of  Peter's  disgraceful  denial 
of  the  Lord  is  given  with  greater  fullness  in  the  second 
Gospel  than  in  any  other.  Here  only  we  read  that  Peter 
stood  in  the  light  of  the  fire  where  his  features  could  be 
easily  recognized,  and  yet  he  denied  his  identity  when  they 
accused  him  of  being  a  disciple.  Here  only  we  are  told  that 
Peter  had  two  warnings  in  the  two  cro wings  of  the  cock, 
and  that  his  denial  therefore  was  doubly  inexcusable.  In 
the  other  Gospels  we  read  that  Peter  went  out  and  wept 
bitterly ;  here  we  read  simply  that  he  wept. 

If  we  are  right  in  following  the  church  tradition  concern- 
ing the  relation  of  the  apostle  Peter  to  the  second  Gospel, 
the  explanation  for  these  omissions  and  additions  in  the 
narratives  directly  concerning  Peter  himself  may  be  found, 
as  Eusebius  suggested,  in  Peter's  personal  humility  in  his 
preaching.  It  is  possible  that  he  maintained  silence  on  cer- 
tain points  and  that  he  did  not  hesitate  to  detail  certain  other 
things  not  so  creditable  to  himself. 

^^  Mark  9.  6. 

^  Morison,  Commentary  on  Mark,  p.  xxxvi. 

"»  Mark  14.  37. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  147 

7.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  the  Strong  Son  of  God. 

(i)  We  notice,  first,  the  announcement  of  the  first  verse, 
"The  beginning  of  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of 
God."  This  Gospel  declares  Jesus  to  be  the  Son  of  God  with 
power,  a  supernatural  power  unequaled  in  human  history. 
We  are  reminded  of  the  opening  invocation  in  Tennyson's  In 
Memoriam : 

"Strong  Son  of  God,  Immortal  Love 

Whom  we,  that  have  not  seen  thy  face, 
By  faith,  and  faith  alone,  embrace, 
Believing  where  we  cannot  prove ; — " 

This  whole  Gospel  emphasizes  the  fact  that  Jesus  is  the 
Strong  Son  of  God. 

(2)  We  already  have  noted  that  the  climax  of  the  Gospel 
comes  in  that  great  confession  of  Peter,  "Thou  art  the 
Christ."  131 

(3)  At  the  close  of  the  crucifixion  history  the  heathen 
centurion  makes  the  startling  statement,  "Truly  this  man 
was  the  Son  of  God."  1^2 

(4)  In  accordance  with  his  emphasis  upon  this  aspect  of 
the  Lord's  ministry  the  Gospel  according  to  Mark  is  char- 
acteristically the  Gospel  of  Miracles.  Miracles  are  more  in 
evidence  here  than  parables  or  discourses.  Matthew  has 
fifteen  parables.  Mark  has  only  four,  and  these  four  are 
in  briefest  form.  But  of  the  thirty-six  miracles  of  which 
we  have  accounts  in  the  Gospels,  Mark  has  the  record  of  one 
half  of  them.  There  are  eighteen  miracles  in  sixteen  chap- 
ters. In  these  Jesus  displays  his  power  over  disease  in 
eight,  and  over  nature  in  five,  and  over  demons  in  four,  and 
over  death  in  one.  All  the  heathen  world  was  looking  for 
some  power  which  would  protect  them  from  evil  spirits. 
Men  always  have  been  striving  for  power  over  nature,  and 
they  always  have  longed  for  power  over  disease  and  death. 

""  Mark  8.  29. 
•*^Mark  15.  39. 


148     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Mark  proclaimed  to  the  whole  Roman  empire  in  this  Gos- 
pel, "At  last  the  power  for  which  the  ages  and  the  many 
races  of  men  have  looked  and  longed  has  been  manifested 
in  Jesus  the  Christ,  He  was  the  Strong  Son  of  God, 
Immortal  Love  united  to  Marvelous  Might." 

There  is  no  miraculo-phobia  in  Mark.  There  is  a  mir- 
acle-mania instead.  He  emphasizes  the  miraculous  through- 
out. Nearly  one  half  of  the  chapters  of  this  book  close  with 
some  comprehensive  summing  up  of  Christ's  ministry  of 
power.133  In  Matt.  i6.  28  we  read  the  prophecy  of  Jesus 
that  some  of  those  standing  by  would  not  die  until  they  saw 
the  Son  of  man  coming  in  his  kingdom.  In  the  parallel  pas- 
sage in  Mark  9.  i  the  prophecy  reads  that  they  would  not 
die  until  they  saw  the  kingdom  of  God  come  with  power. 
Nearly  one  half  of  this  Gospel  is  given  to  the  narration  of 
the  deeds  of  power  which  proved  that  one  mightier  than 
men  and  mightier  than  any  of  the  heathen  gods,  even  the 
mighty  Son  of  God  himself,  had  appeared  to  save  the  race. 
That  is  the  ultimate  end  aimed  at  in  all  these  marvels.  The 
last  statement  we  find  in  the  appendix  to  the  Gospel  is  that 
the  apostles  went  forth  and  preached  everywhere  after  the 
ascension,  the  Lord  working  with  them,  and  confirming  the 
word  by  the  signs  that  followed.^^*  The  Lord  is  still  at 
work.  His  mighty  deeds  never  have  ended.  They  will  not 
end  until  all  the  world  has  been  reached  and  the  whole 
creation  has  been  redeemed. 

Mark  shows  us  again  and  again  how  the  work  of  Jesus 
astonished  the  people  of  that  generation  in  which  he  lived. 
"They  were  all  amazed,  insomuch  that  they  questioned 
among  themselves,  saying,  What  is  this?  a  new  teaching! 
with  authority  he  commandeth  even  the  unclean  spirits,  and 
they  obey  him."  ^^^  The  paralytic  was  healed,  and  then  we 
read,  "They  were  all  amazed,  and  glorified  God,  saying, 

'^  See  Chaps,  i,  2,  4,  6,  7,  10,  14,  i6. 
""  Mark  16.  20. 
'"Mark  i.  2j. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  149 

We  never  saw  it  on  this  fashion."  ^^^  The  daughter  of 
Jairus  was  restored  to  her  parents  and  the  news  was  car- 
ried to  the  people,  and  we  read,  "They  were  amazed  straight- 
way with  a  great  amazement."  ^^^  He  taught  in  the  syna- 
gogue, and  Mark  tells  us  that  "many  hearing  him  were 
astonished."  ^^^  Jesus  walked  upon  the  sea  and  stilled  the 
storm,  and  Mark  says  that  the  disciples  "were  sore  amazed 
in  themselves"  at  all  these  things. ^^9  ^  deaf  man  who  had 
an  impediment  in  his  speech  was  brought  to  Jesus  and  his 
ears  were  opened  and  his  tongue  loosed  so  that  he  spake 
plain.  Then,  says  Mark,  "They  were  beyond  measure 
astonished,  saying.  He  hath  done  all  things  well :  he  maketh 
even  the  deaf  to  hear,  and  the  dumb  to  speak."  ^*^  All 
along  the  course  of  Jesus  through  this  Gospel  the  people  are 
astonished  by  his  words  and  his  works.  He  arouses  amaze- 
ment on  every  hand  and  at  every  turn.  If  these  things  were 
true  at  the  beginning  what  will  be  true  at  the  end?  The 
whole  universe  will  be  astonished  at  the  glorious  outcome  of 
the  gospel  of  Jesus  the  Christ,  the  Strong  Son  of  God. 

(5)  It  is  a  Mighty  Victor  who  is  presented  to  us  in  the 
pages  of  this  Gospel.  He  has  power  over  demons,  disease, 
and  death.  There  is  no  malady  he  may  not  cure.  There 
is  no  Satanic  power  he  may  not  bind  and  despoil  of  all  its 
vaunted  wealth.  He  is  the  Strongest  of  the  strong.  Death, 
the  universal  conqueror,  has  no  power  over  him.  He  healed 
the  leper  with  a  touch.  He  healed  the  paralytic  or  the 
dumb  with  a  word.  He  recalled  the  dead  to  life.  He  de- 
fied any  prejudice  of  the  Jews  which  was  not  founded  upon 
the  prescriptions  of  the  Mosaic  Law.  He  broke  the  Sabbath 
regulations  of  the  scribes  without  hesitation.  He  sat  down 
to  dine  with  publicans  and  sinners  with  perfect  composure. 

'"Mark  2.  12. 

'"  Mark  5.  42. 

'»» Mark  6.  2. 

•"  Mark  6.  51. 

•♦»  Mark  7.  37. 


150     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

He  claimed  authority  to  forgive  sins.  He  defied  his  foes 
at  will,  and  foiled  their  designs  against  him  whenever  he 
chose.  He  cleansed  the  temple  from  all  of  those  who  defiled 
it  and  turned  it  into  a  den  of  thieves.  He  faced  the  Sanhe- 
drin  in  calm  contempt.  He  was  a  Victor  even  while  he  hung 
upon  the  cross;  and  he  rose  from  the  grave  to  be  crowned 
Eternal  Victor  and  to  be  seated  on  the  throne.  "Could  any- 
thing appeal  more  strongly  to  the  Roman  mind  than  this  idea 
of  a  mighty  conqueror,  before  whom  nothing  was  able  to 
stand — a  conqueror  who  was  destined  to  achieve  world-wide 
empire?  And  in  the  hour  of  her  weakness  what  encourage- 
ment ought  to  come  to  the  church  from  the  reflection  that 
the  Mighty  Christ  whom  Mark  portrays  is  moving  steadily 
forward,  overcoming  all  opposition,  subduing  all  things 
to  the  will  of  heaven,  and  establishing  on  the  earth  a  king- 
dom that  cannot  be  shaken !"  ^^^  We  hasten  now  to  add  an- 
other characterization  of  the  second  Gospel,  which  seems 
to  us  to  represent  its  distinguishing  feature. 

8.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Service. 

The  second  Gospel  is  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  as  the  Servant 
of  all.  The  Gospel  of  the  Son  of  God  would  as  a  matter  of 
course  be  the  Gospel  of  the  Servant  of  Jehovah.  Sonship 
and  service  always  are  joined  in  the  Scriptures.  In  Exodus 
we  read,  "Israel  is  my  son,  my  first-born ;  let  my  son  go,  that 
he  may  serve  me."  ^^2  p^ul  exhorts  all  the  sons  of  God  to 
present  their  bodies  holy,  acceptable  unto  God,  which  is  their 
spiritual  service.^^^  xhe  incarnate  Son  of  God,  the  First- 
Born,  did  that.  He  took  upon  him  the  form  of  a  servant.^^^ 
His  life  was  a  life  of  devoted  and  incessant  service.  The 
Pentecostal  church  called  the  Lord  by  that  title,  "Thy  holy 
Servant  Jesus,  whom  thou  didst  anoint."  ^^^     They  said, 

"'  Campbell,  The  Teachings  of  the  Books,  p.  52. 
^*^Exod.  4.  22,  23. 
"'  Rom.  12,  I,  2. 
"*  Phil.  2.  7. 
""Acts  4.  27. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  151 

"God  .  .  .  hath  glorified  his  Servant  Jesus."  ^^^  Mat- 
thew presented  the  King;  Mark  presents  the  Servant.  The 
symbol  of  Matthew  was  the  lion;  that  of  Mark  is  the  ox. 
This  is  the  Gospel  of  the  Minister,  the  Gospel  of  the  min- 
istering Christ,  the  One  who  came  not  to  be  ministered 
unto  but  to  minister. 

This  contrast  between  the  second  Gospel  and  the  other 
synoptics  is  apparent,  (i)  in  the  omissions  in  Mark's  nar- 
rative, (a)  He  has  no  royal  genealogy,  no  story  of  a  super- 
natural conception,  no  worship  by  Wise  Men  come  from 
afar  to  oflFer  their  gifts  to  a  new-born  King,  as  Matthew  had. 
(b)  He  does  not  begin  with  any  reference  to  preexistent  and 
everexistent  glory,  as  John  does,  (c)  Mark  has  no  Sermon 
on  the  Mount,  laying  down  the  laws  for  a  new  kingdom, 
for  here  we  have  the  servant  and  not  the  king,  (d)  Here 
we  find  no  national  manifesto  and  arraignment  and  judg- 
ment, such  as  the  other  Gospels  have,  (e)  Here  there  is  no 
reference  to  his  right  to  summon  twelve  legions  of  angels 
to  his  help.  (/)  Here  there  is  no  promise  of  paradise  to  the 
thief  on  the  cross.  These  things  belong  to  the  prerogatives 
of  a  king,  (g)  It  has  even  been  suggested  that  the  Gos- 
pel closed  abruptly  at  12.  8  as  it  begins  abruptly  with  the 
active  ministry,  because  this  is  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  as  the 
Servant.  "A  servant  comes,  fulfils  his  task,  and  departs — 
we  do  not  ask  about  his  lineage,  nor  follow  his  subsequent 
history."  ^■^''  Mark  himself  was  a  servant,  simply  an  at- 
tendant upon  Barnabas,  Peter,  and  Paul.  He  was  useful  in 
ministering  to  these  greater  men,  and  his  ideal  came  to  be 
that  of  faithful  administration  of  daily  duties  in  the  service 
of  the  church.  This  may  in  some  measure  account  for  the 
emphasis  upon  this  side  of  the  character  of  Jesus.  Alark 
represents  him  as  the  perfect  Servant  of  men,  as  well  as 
the  perfect  Servant  of  God. 

(2)  The  spirit  of  Jesus  throughout  is  the  self-surrender- 

•'•Acts  3-  13- 

"'The  International  Standard  Bible  Encyclopaedia,  p.  1989. 


152     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

irig  spirit  of  devotion  and  love.  The  ardor  of  his  spirit  and 
the  fervor  of  his  service  are  made  noticeable  in  this  Gospel, 
The  Spirit  drives  him  into  the  wildemess.^^^  He  is  angry 
and  grieved.^'* ^  He  sighs  deeply.^^^^  He  is  moved  with 
indignation.^^^  His  friends  declared  he  was  beside  himself, 
crazy,  and  that  he  ought  to  be  put  under  restraint.^^^  These 
are  indications  of  the  great  stress  upon  him  all  the  time. 

Jesus  is  an  indefatigable  Servant  in  this  Gospel,  never 
faltering  in  his  devotion,  always  ready  at  any  call  of  need.^^^ 
He  is  a  model  to  all  ministers,  saying  little  and  working 
much.  He  is  tireless  in  sympathy  and  in  labor,  quiet  and 
unostentatious,  ready  and  reliable.  He  was  the  holy  Servant 
of  the  Father  in  everything.  He  was  wholly  the  servant  of 
men  all  the  time. 

(3)  In  this  Gospel  alone  do  we  find  the  explicit  state- 
ment of  the  limitation  of  knowledge  on  the  part  of  the 
Incarnate  One.^^* 

(4)  The  only  parable  peculiar  to  this  Gospel  seems  to 
emphasize  the  point  of  the  utter  dependence  of  man  upon 
the  higher  powers  and  the  necessity  of  his  utter  obedience 
to  their  behests. ^^^ 

(5)  "It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that,  while  this  Gospel  de- 
picts the  Jesus  of  history  so  preeminently  in  his  power,  it 
records  with  literal  faithfulness  things  which  might  seem 
so  far  to  limit  that  power.  It  tells  us  how  the  unclean  spirits 
first  resisted,  i.  24,  and  how  he  could  do  no  mighty  work 
in  Nazareth  because  of  their  unbelief,  6.  5.  It  describes  with 
precise  and  vivid  circumstance  those  miracles  which  were 
wrought  not  instantaneously  and  by  word,  but  with  com- 
parative slowness  and  by  the  use  of  means,  7.  31-35 ;  8. 
22-26.  It  is  also  rich  in  touches  which  speak  to  the  identity 
of  Christ's  human  nature  with  ours  in  feeling  and  in  the 

**»Mark  i.  12.  '"Mark  3.  21. 

'^•Mark  3.  5.  '"Mark  i.  35-38;  3-  20;  6.  31. 

•"•  Mark  8.  12.  '"  Mark  13.  32. 

'"  Mark  10.  14.  ""  Mark  4.  26-29. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  153 

experience  of  infirmity,  revealing  him  not  only  in  his  com- 
passion, 6.  34;  8.  2;  his  love,  10.  21;  his  majesty  and 
serenity,  4.  37-40;  9.  2-9;  but  in  his  sense  of  hunger,  11.  12; 
his  need  of  rest,  4.  38;  his  anger  and  displeasure,  3.  5; 
10.  14;  his  sighing,  7.  34;  8.  12;  his  wonder,  6.  6;  his  grief, 
3.  5;  his  longing  for  solitude,  i.  35;  6.  30-32."  i^e  x^e 
power  of  the  Son  of  God  in  this  Gospel  is  the  power  of  a 
Servant,  dependent  in  real  humanity. 

(6)  It  is  a  strange  and  most  interesting  fact  that  Mark 
persistently  and  consistently  omits  the  title  "Lord,"  as  ap- 
plied to  Jesus,  throughout  the  record  of  his  earthly  ministry, 
(a)  In  Matt.  8.  2  we  read  that  a  leper  came  worshiping  him 
and  saying,  "Lord,  if  thou  wilt,  thou  canst  make  me  clean." 
We  turn  to  Mark  i.  40  and  we  read  of  the  same  incident  and 
we  are  told  that  the  leper  made  the  same  speech,  except  that 
he  omits  the  title  "Lord."  The  leper  said,  "If  thou  wilt, 
thou  canst  make  me  clean."  We  possibly  might  never  notice 
a  slight  difference  of  that  sort  if  it  occurred  but  once; 
but  we  find  that  it  runs  through  the  entire  Gospel,  (b)  In 
Matt.  8.  25  we  read  of  the  tempest  on  the  sea  while  Jesus 
was  sleeping,  and  how  the  disciples  awoke  him  saying, 
"Save,  Lord ;  we  perish."  Then  we  turn  to  Mark  4.  38  and 
we  read  that  the  disciples  said,  "Teacher,  carest  thou  not 
that  we  perish?"  According  to  Mark,  they  called  Jesus 
"Teacher"  and  not  "Lord."  (c)  In  Matt.  17.  4  Peter  on 
the  mount  of  transfiguration  says  to  Jesus,  "Lord,  it  is  good 
for  us  to  be  here :  if  thou  wilt,  I  will  make  here  three  taber- 
nacles ;  one  for  thee,  and  one  for  Moses,  and  one  for  Elijah." 
Surely,  if  there  was  any  one  moment  in  the  life  of  Jesus 
when  Peter  would  have  been  most  likely  to  have  called 
Jesus  "Lord,"  it  would  have  been  here  when  the  trans- 
figuration glory  was  blinding  their  eyes;  yet  when  we  turn 
to  the  Gospel  according  to  Mark,  which  is  supposed  to  record 
Peter's  own  reminiscences  of  these  things,  and  read  of  this 
experience  there,  we  find  that  Peter  said  to  Jesus,  "Rabbi, 

"^  Salmond,  in  Hastings's  Bible  Dictionary,  vol.  iii,  p.  255. 


154     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

it  is  good  for  us  to  be  here,"  9.  5.  Surely,  Peter  would  be  the 
best  authority  for  what  he  himself  said  on  this  occasion,  and 
we  must  conclude,  therefore,  that  even  at  the  transfiguration 
Peter  called  Jesus  "Rabbi"  and  not  "Lord."  (d)  In  Matt. 
17.  15  we  read  that  when  they  came  down  from  the  mount 
of  transfiguration  a  man  met  them  who  kneeled  to  Jesus 
and  said,  "Lord,  have  mercy  on  my  son :  for  he  is  epileptic." 
Then  we  turn  to  Mark  9.  17  and  we  find  that  the  man  said, 
"Teacher,  I  brought  unto  thee  my  son."  "Teacher,"  not 
"Lord"!  (e)  In  Luke  18.  41  Jesus  asks  the  blind  man  at 
Jericho,  "What  wilt  thou  that  I  should  do  unto  thee  ?"  And 
he  said,  "Lord,  that  I  may  receive  my  sight."  In  Mark 
10.  51  Jesus  asks  the  same  question,  but  the  blind  man 
answers,  "Rabboni,  that  I  may  receive  my  sight."  "Rab- 
boni,"  not  "Lord"!  Mark  prefers  to  call  Jesus  Rabboni, 
Rabbi,  Teacher.  He  makes  frequent  references  to  his 
teaching,  and  the  words  ^t^axv,  "teaching,"  and  diddoKO), 
"teach,"  are  found  more  often  in  this  Gospel  than  in  any 
other,  (f)  When  at  the  Last  Supper  Jesus  said  that  one  of 
the  apostles  should  betray  him  we  read  in  Matt.  26.  22  that 
every  one  said  to  him,  "Is  it  I,  Lord  ?"  We  compare  Mark 
14.  19  and  we  find  that  they  each  asked,  "Is  it  I  ?"  but  they 
omit  the  title  "Lord." 

This,  then,  is  characteristic  of  the  Gospel  according  to 
Mark  throughout.  It  never  calls  Jesus  "Lord"  before  his 
resurrection  except  on  one  occasion,  (g)  In  Mark  7.  28  the 
Syrojihoeaiician  woman,  a  heathen  woman  with  all  the 
heathen  superstitions,  says  to  Jesus,  "Yea,  Lord;  even  the 
dogs  under  the  table  eat  of  the  children's  crumbs."  With 
this  single  exception,  in  which  the  title  is  used  not  by  any 
disciple  but  by  a  heathen  Greek  woman,  this  oldest  of  the 
Gospels  carefully  refrains  from  calling  Jesus  "Lord"  until 
after  his  resurrection  from  the  dead,  (h)  In  Mark  16.  19 
we  read,  "So  then  the  Lord  Jesus,  after  he  had  spoken  unto 
them,  was  received  up  into  heaven,  and  sat  down  at  the  right 
hand  of  God."     (i)   Then  in  the  next  verse,  the  closing 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  155 

verse  of  the  appendix  to  the  Gospel,  16.  20,  we  read  that 
they  went  forth  and  preached  everywhere,  "the  Lord  work- 
ing with  them,  and  confirming  the  word  with  the  signs  that 
followed."  This  title  "Lord"  is  the  only  title  given  to 
Jesus  in  the  post-resurrection  appendix  to  the  second  Gospel, 
It  may  be  possible  that  this  uniform  practice  of  the  second 
Gospel  may  represent  the  opinion  of  Peter  that  the  title 
"Lord"  was  rightly  applicable  to  the  Saviour  only  after  he 
had  passed  from  the  humiliation  of  the  incarnation  to  the 
exaltation  of  the  resurrection  and  ascension  existence  in 
unrestricted  divine  power.  It  may  represent  the  uniform 
practice  of  Peter  himself.  (/)  At  any  rate,  when  we  turn 
to  the  sermon  which  Peter  preached  at  Pentecost  we  find 
that  he  begins  with  the  "man  Jesus,"  approved  of  God,  but 
crucified  and  buried,  Acts  2:  22,  23.  (k)  Then  he  goes  on 
to  say,  "This  Jesus  did  God  raise  up,"  2,  32 ;  and  it  was  the 
resurrected  Jesus  whom  "David  called  Lord,"  2.  34.  (/) 
When  he  comes  to  the  conclusion  and  the  climax  of  that 
sermon  he  makes  the  statement  that  Jesus  has  a  right  to  a 
new  title  now :  "Let  all  the  house  of  Israel  therefore  know 
assuredly,  that  God  hath  made  him  both  Lord  and  Christ, 
this  Jesus  whom  ye  crucified,"  2.  36.  We  have  known  him 
as  Jesus;  we  will  know  him  henceforth  as  Lord!  The 
resurrection  and  ascension  have  proved  his  right  to  bear 
that  name.  Mark  has  refrained  from  calling  Jesus  "Lord" 
during  the  time  of  his  public  ministry.  This  title  is  granted 
to  Jesus  only  after  his  exaltation  to  the  Father's  throne.  In 
the  second  Gospel  Jesus  is  a  Teacher,  a  Minister,  a  Servant, 
and  not  a  Lord. 

IV.  Noteworthy  Additions  to  the  Gospel  Narrative 

There  is  very  little  material  in  Mark  which  is  not  repro- 
duced either  in  Matthew  or  Luke.  The  incidents  or  sayings 
which  are  peculiar  to  Mark  fill  not  more  than  fifty  verses^^^ 

"'  Hawkins,  Horae  Synopticae,  ii. 


156     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

and  form  only  about  seven  per  cent  of  the  total  contents. 
We  note  some  of  these  things  found  only  in  Mark : 

1.  There  is  one  parable  not  found  elsewhere,  that  of  the 
seed  growing  without  man's  interference  between  sowing 
and  harvest.^^^ 

2.  There  are  two  miracles  of  healing  found  only  in  Mark, 
that  of  the  deaf  and  dumb  man,  and  that  of  the  blind  man.^^^ 

3.  Here  only  we  read  that  the  friends  of  Jesus  thought 
seriously  of  interfering  with  his  ministry  and  violently  re- 
straining him  because  they  had  concluded  that  he  was  beside 
himself.i«o 

4.  Here  only  we  find  the  statement  that  during  his  youth 
and  young  manhood  Jesus  was  a  carpenter  and  worked  at 
the  carpenter's  trade.^^^  Matthew  changes  the  passage  to 
read,  "the  son  of  the  carpenter."  i®^  Doubtless  Joseph  the 
father  was  a  carpenter  and  Jesus  the  son  followed  his 
father's  trade. 

5.  Mark  alone  gives  us  Christ's  abrogation  of  the  Levit- 
ical  law  concerning  the  clean  and  unclean  meats :  "This  he 
said,  making  all  meats  clean."  ^^^  It  was  as  if  Jesus  had 
taken  the  Bible  of  his  day,  the  Book  of  the  Law,  and  had 
torn  a  leaf  right  out  of  it.  He  declared  that  the  eleventh 
chapter  of  Leviticus  was  out  of  date  henceforth,  and  no  one 
was  to  be  bound  by  its  regulations.  He  did  not  know  that 
modem  critics  would  decide  that  the  so-called  Law  of  Holi- 
ness there  in  the  book  of  Leviticus  was  of  comparatively 
late  date  and,  since  post  exilic  in  its  origin,  not  to  be  com- 
pared with  the  primitive  Mosaic  regulations  in  its  authority. 
He  did  not  rule  out  these  refinements  of  the  ritual  on  any 
grounds  of  original  authorship.  With  his  clear  sight  and 
common  sense  it  seemed  to  be  self-evident  that  men  were 
not  defiled  by  their  food,  but  by  evil  thoughts  and  prac- 


'"  Mark  4.  26-29.  '"  Mark  6.  3. 

""  Mark  7.  32-37 ;  8.  22-26.  '"  Matt.  13.  55. 

""Mark  3.  21.  "*  Mark  7.  19. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  157 

tices.  A  man's  stomach  might  be  upset  and  it  would  right 
itself  by  the  processes  of  nature;  but  if  a  man's  heart  were 
defiled,  it  would  not  right  itself  naturally.  That  defilement 
remained  and  was  the  prolific  source  of  all  wrongdoing. 

It  did  not  matter  so  much  what  was  in  a  man's  stomach ; 
it  mattered  much  what  was  in  a  man's  heart.  He  might  eat 
anything  which  was  wholesome  and  not  be  defiled.  He 
might  be  a  meat  eater  and  be  a  good  man.  He  might  ob- 
serve all  the  distinctions  laid  down  between  clean  and  un- 
clean meats  there  in  Leviticus  and  be  a  villain.  He  might 
be  a  vegetarian  and  not  be  a  saint.  It  was  not  that  which 
went  into  a  man's  stomach  which  defiled  him ;  it  was  that 
which  went  into  his  heart.  He  could  not  retain  anything 
in  his  stomach  very  long;  he  could  cherish  corruption 
within  his  heart.  It  was  the  common  sense  of  a  carpenter, 
a  plain  working  man,  which  spoke  in  these  words.  If  any 
regulations  in  the  book  of  Leviticus  ran  counter  to  the  dic- 
tates of  common  sense,  Jesus  for  one  was  ready  to  set  them 
aside.  Ritual  purity  did  not  count  in  comparison  with  pur- 
ity of  heart.  Ritual  regulations  which  did  not  approve 
themselves  to  the  reason  might  with  reason  be  abandoned  at 
once.  It  always  has  been  the  plain  man's  attitude  to  ecclesi- 
astical prescriptions.  It  was  the  attitude  of  Jesus.  He 
had  no  such  reverence  for  the  Word  of  God  as  contained  in 
a  book  that  he  was  not  willing  to  listen  to  the  word  of  God 
in  his  own  soul.  If  the  two  ever  came  into  conflict,  the  book 
was  set  aside. 

6.  Mark  alone  has  the  three  questions  put  by  Jesus  to  the 
disciples,  "Having  eyes,  see  ye  not?  and  having  ears,  hear 
ye  not?  and  do  ye  not  remember?"  1**  It  was  a  threefold 
indictment  of  their  stupidity. 

7.  Mark  alone  has  the  incident  of  the  young  man  who  fled 
naked  from  the  garden.^^^ 


'-  Mark  8.  18. 

'"  Mark   14.  51,  52. 


158     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

8.  Mark  alone  tells  us  that  Jesus  was  smitten  by  the  serv- 
ants of  the  chief  priests.^^^ 

9.  We  learn  from  Mark  alone  that  Pilate  was  so  surprised 
when  he  heard  that  Jesus  was  already  dead  that  he  sent  for 
the  centurion  to  have  his  corroboration  of  the  news.^^'^ 
These  are  minor  particulars,  some  of  them,  but  we  could 
ill  spare  any  of  them. 

V.  The  Style  of  the  Gospel 

We  add  just  a  few  words  on  the  style  of  the  book.  The 
Greek  of  the  second  Gospel  is  comparatively  poor  and 
sometimes  incorrect.  We  note  the  following  characteristics 
of  style : 

1.  There  is  a  poverty  of  connecting  particles.  Take 
3.  1-26  for  an  example.  The  conjunction  "and"  occurs  in 
these  verses  forty-six  times,  and  thirty  times  it  is  used  in 
connecting  sentences  with  each  other.  The  conjunction 
"for"  is  found  twice  and  the  conjunction  "but"  is  found 
once ;  and  that  ends  the  list  in  this  passage.  Mark  uses  only 
the  simpler  conjunctions  as  a  rule,  and  the  simplest  of  them 
all  most  of  the  time.  "In  Bruder's  Konkordanz,  under  icai, 
in  oratione  historica,  Matthew  occupies  four  columns,  Luke 
six  and  a  half,  John  one  and  three  fourths.  Acts  two  and 
two  thirds,  while  the  short  Gospel  according  to  Mark  oc- 
cupies six  and  a  half.  Even  when  the  relation  is  adver- 
sative Mark  is  satisfied  with  icai,  as  in  6.  19  and  12.  12."  i^s 

2.  There  are  several  broken  and  irregular  grammatical 
constructions  in  this  Gospel ;  for  example,  3.  15 ;  4.  1 1 ;  4.  15 ; 
6.  22;  9.  41 ;  13.  14;  14.  y2.  In  some  of  these  passages  it  is 
difficult  to  determine  the  exact  meaning  because  of  the  diffi- 
cult constructions.  There  are  not  as  many  flagrant  errors 
of  grammar  in  Mark,  however,  as  in  the  Apocalypse. 

3.  Mark  has  nine  or  more  of  what  the  Greek  gramma- 

**Mark  14.  65. 
^^'Mark  15.  44. 
'°*Zahn,  op.  cit.,  p.  502. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  159 

rians  called  vulgarisms,  all  of  which  are  avoided  in  the  par- 
allel accounts  by  Luke. 

4.  Mark  is  more  Hebraistic  than  Matthew  or  Luke  and 
has  more  genuine  Semitic  idioms  than  even  the  Apocalypse 
of  John. 

VL  The  Most  Authentic  and  Authoritative  Gospel 

We  have  seen  that  the  consensus  of  modern  scholarship 
tends  to  the  conclusion  that  Mark  was  the  first  chronolog- 
ically to  compose  a  Gospel.  He  is  not  an  abbreviator  of  the 
Gospel  according  to  Matthew  or  of  any  other  Gospel.  On 
the  other  hand,  there  are  numerous  and  convincing  evi- 
dences of  the  fact  that  the  other  Gospel  writers  had  the 
narrative  of  Mark,  or  one  very  similar  to  it,  before  them 
when  they  wrote.  Mark  has  not  abbreviated  them;  they 
have  revised  and  enlarged  him.  In  Mark's  record,  there- 
fore, we  come  nearest  in  time  to  the  words  and  the  works 
of  the  Lord.    This  is  the  primitive  evangelic  tradition. 

Dr.  Horton  has  said  of  it:  "The  famous  Church  of  Saint 
Mark  at  Venice  is  singular  amongst  mediaeval  churches  in 
two  respects.  In  the  first  place,  the  mosaics  which  cover 
it,  wholly  within  and  largely  without,  form,  as  it  were,  an 
illustrated  Bible  which  speaks  rather  to  the  eye  than  to  the 
ear;  and,  secondly,  in  this  church  Christ  and  the  cross  take 
the  place  of  preeminence,  which  elsewhere  is  occupied  by 
Mary  and  the  saints.  Now,  curiously  enough,  these  two 
features  of  the  great  Church  of  Saint  Mark  at  Venice  ac- 
curately reflect  the  two  most  striking  characteristics  of  the 
Gospel  which  is  called  by  the  name  of  Mark.  This  Gospel 
stands  out  among  the  four  as  the  most  picturesque — the  one 
in  which  everything  passes,  as  it  were,  before  the  eye.  Its 
chapters  are  Tike  the  mosaics  in  the  great  church,  or  like 
the  cartoons  of  a  great  painter,  presenting  the  appearance 
and  the  actions  of  Christ.  Further,  this  Gospel  is  so  occu- 
pied with  Christ  alone,  that  the  other  figures  which  appear 
in  the  canvases  of  Matthew  and  Luke — ^Joseph  and  Mary, 


i6o     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

John  the  Baptist,  the  disciples,  the  groups  of  Jews — all  sink 
into  the  background ;  they  are  mere  suggestions ;  their  por- 
traits are  not  attempted.  This  Gospel  is  in  literature  the 
earliest,  the  simplest,  the  most  direct  likeness  of  Jesus  alone. 
The  other  Gospels  have  their  distinguishing  merits — each 
is  invaluable,  but  for  unity  and  completeness  of  impression, 
for  lifelike  contact  with  the  subject  of  the  narrative,  for 
immediate  perception  of  our  Lord  as  he  would  appear  to  the 
eyes  of  the  men  who  knew  him — to  such  eyes  as  Peter's, 
for  example,  during  the  brief  period  from  the  beginning  of 
his  public  ministry  to  his  premature  death — for  these  pur- 
poses this  second  Gospel  stands  unique  among  our  New 
Testament  treasures."  ^^^ 

Bishop  Westcott  has  given  us  this  estimate  of  the  second 
Gospel:  "In  substance  and  style  and  treatment  the  Gospel 
according  to  Mark  is  essentially  a  transcript  from  life.  The 
course  and  the  issue  of  facts  are  imaged  in  it  with  the  clear- 
est outline.  If  all  other  arguments  against  the  mythic 
origin  of  the  evangelic  narratives  were  wanting,  this 
vivid  and  simple  record,  stamped  with  the  most  distinct 
impress  of  independence  and  originality — totally  uncon- 
nected with  the  symbolism  of  the  Old  Dispensation,  totally 
independent  of  the  deeper  reasonings  of  the  New — would  be 
sufficient  to  refute  a  theory  subversive  of  all  faith  in  his- 
tory." ^''^  It  is  doubtful  whether  we  could  say  as  much  con- 
cerning any  of  the  other  Gospels.  They  all  bear  evidence  of 
more  or  less  doctrinal  bias,  and  their  accounts  are  colored 
more  or  less  by  the  theological  viewpoint  of  the  authors. 

The  difference  between  Mark  and  Matthew,  who  probably 
came  next  in  chronological  order,  can  be  seen  in  any  com- 
parison of  their  parallel  accounts. 

I.  The  second  Gospel  does  not  hesitate  to  ascribe  all  the 
natural  human  emotions  to  Jesus.  Again  and  again  Mat- 
thew omits  the  descriptions  given  by  Mark,  as  in  Mark 

"*  The  Cartoons  of  Saint  Mark,  pp.  3,  4. 

""  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels,  p.  369. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  i6i 

3.  5,  "had  looked  round  about  on  them  with  anger,  being 
grieved";  and  i.  41,  "having  been  moved  with  compassion"; 
and  I.  43,  "having  sternly  charged  him";  and  3.  21,  "He  is 
beside  himself";  and  6.  6,  "he  marveled";  and  8.  12,  "having 
groaned  in  spirit" ;  and  10.  14,  "he  was  moved  with  indigna- 
tion"; and  10.  21,  "looking  upon  him  loved  him,"  All  of 
these  emotional  experiences  of  Jesus  are  omitted  in  Mat- 
thew's account.  Is  this  an  evidence  of  a  growing  reverence 
for  Jesus  which  hesitated  to  chronicle  the  fact  that  he  had 
shown  the  same  emotions  with  ordinary  humanity?  It  has 
been  so  suggested.  At  any  rate,  we  feel  that  in  Mark's  nar- 
rative we  come  closer  to  the  real  Jesus  and  that  we  see  him 
as  he  is,  with  no  glamour  of  reverence  thrown  about  his 
person  and  no  reservation  as  to  his  real  character. 

2.  The  second  Gospel  tells  us  that  Jesus  wished  for  certain 
things  which  he  did  not  obtain,  and  found  that  there  were 
certain  things  which  he  could  not  do;  and  Matthew  either 
omits  these  statements  altogether  or  so  modifies  them  as  to 
leave  the  inability  of  Jesus  out  of  sight  in  a  large  measure. 
For  example,  in  Mark  we  read  in  i.  45,  "Jesus  no  longer 
was  able  to  enter  into  a  city" ;  and  in  6.  5,  "he  was  not  able 
to  do  any  miracle  there."  Matt.  13.  58  changes  this  state- 
ment into  "H'e  did  not  many  miracles  there."  The  follow- 
ing statements  as  to  the  desires  of  Jesus,  found  in  Mark,  are 
omitted  altogether  in  Matthew.  In  Mark  6.  48  we  read, 
"He  was  willing  to  pass  them  by" ;  and  in  7.  24,  "He  en- 
tered into  a  house,  and  he  was  desiring  no  one  to  know  it; 
and  he  was  not  able  to  escape  observation";  and  in  9.  30, 
"He  not  desiring  that  any  man  should  know  it." 

3.  Mark  represents  Jesus  as  asking  questions  for  informa- 
tion continually.  Matthew  for  the  most  part  leaves  these 
questions  out  of  his  narrative.  For  example,  the  questions 
asked  by  Jesus,  recorded  in  Mark  5.  9;  5.  30;  6.  38;  8.  12; 
8.  23 ;  9.  12 ;  9.  16 ;  9.  21 ;  9.  33 ;  10.  3 ;  14.  14  are  all  omitted 
by  Matthew. 

4.  The  following  differences  between  Mark  and  Matthew 


i62     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

are  noticeable  and  may  be  due  to  the  cause  we  have 
mentioned,  (a)  In  Mark  6.  3  we  read  that  Jesus  was  a 
carpenter;  but  in  Matt.  13.  55  it  is  changed  into  "the  son  of 
a  carpenter,"  (b)  In  Mark  10.  18  Jesus  asks,  "Why  dost 
thou  call  me  good?"  In  Matt.  19.  17  the  question  becomes, 
"Why  askest  thou  me  concerning  that  which  is  good?"  (c) 
In  Mark  i.  ^2,  33  we  read  that  all  who  were  sick  were 
brought  to  Jesus  and  that  he  healed  many.  Matt.  8.  16  just 
changes  the  terms  about  and  tells  us  that  many  were  brought 
and  all  were  healed,  (d)  Mark  records  two  miracles  of  heal- 
ing in  which  Jesus  made  use  of  physical  means  and  in  one 
of  which  the  cure  seems  to  be  gradual  and  effected  with  some 
difficulty.  Matthew  omits  these  miracles,  and  records  others 
in  which  the  cure  was  effected  with  a  word,  (e)  Mark  9.  26 
tells  us  how  the  poor  epileptic  boy  suffered  after  Jesus  had 
commanded  the  dumb  and  deaf  spirit  to  come  out  of  him, 
"Having  .  .  .  torn  him  much,  he  came  out:  and  the  boy 
became  as  one  dead;  insomuch  that  the  more  part  said,  He 
is  dead."  Matthew  omits  all  these  details.  We  might  draw 
the  same  contrast  between  Mark  and  Luke  or  between  Mark 
and  John  as  between  Mark  and  Matthew.  All  the  other 
evangelists  believe  just  as  thoroughly  as  Mark  in  the  real 
humanity  of  Jesus  and  have  given  manifold  proofs  of  it  in 
their  narratives,  but  there  is  an  openness  and  unreserved- 
ness  in  Mark's  account  which  we  miss  in  the  others.  He  is 
frank  in  statement  and  free  from  dogmatic  bias  of  any  sort. 
He  reverences  nothing  so  much  as  the  plain  and  unadorned 
truth  of  things. 

5.  He  does  not  shield  the  apostles  at  any  point.     Here 
again  we  can  contrast  his  narrative  with  that  of  Matthew. 

(a)  In  Mark  4.  13  Jesus  rebukes  his  disciples,  "Do  ye  not 
know  this  parable  ?  and  how  shall  ye  appreciate  all  the  para- 
bles?" In  Matt.  13.  16  this  rebuke  is  omitted  and  a  blessing 
recorded  in  its  place,  "Blessed  are  your  eyes,  for  they  see." 

(b)  In  Mark  8.  17  Jesus  is  rebuking  the  disciples  again  and 
he  says  to  them,  "Do  ye  not  yet  perceive,  neither  under- 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  163 

stand?  have  ye  your  heart  hardened?  Having  eyes,  see  ye 
not?  and  having  ears,  hear  ye  not?  and  do  ye  not  remem- 
ber?" In  the  parallel  account  in  IMatt.  16.  9  all  of  this  re- 
buke is  omitted,  (c)  Again  in  Mark  6.  52  we  find  the  state- 
ment, "They  understood  not  concerning  the  loaves,  but  their 
heart  was  hardened."  This  statement  is  omitted  in  Mat- 
thew 14.  33.  (d)  In  Mark  9.  10  we  read  that  the  disciples 
were  questioning  among  themselves  what  the  rising  again 
from  the  dead  should  mean,  and  in  9.  33,  34  they  are  dis- 
puting on  the  public  way  as  to  who  was  the  greater 
among  them.  Matthew  omits  all  record  of  these  disputes. 
(e)  In  Mark  9.  32  we  read,  "And  they  understood  not  the 
saying,  and  were  afraid  to  ask  him."  In  Matt.  17.  23  this 
is  softened  down  to  the  comparatively  complimentary  state- 
ment, "And  they  were  exceedingly  sorry."  (/)  Again  in 
14.  40  Mark  says  that  the  disciples  knew  not  what  to  answer 
Jesus;  and  Matthew  omits  this  statement  of  their  incapac- 
ity.^^i  These  contrasts  between  Mark  and  Matthew  are 
sufficient  to  show  that  we  have  a  primary  account  in  Mark 
which  has  been  modified  for  various  reasons  in  all  the  later 
records. 

Therefore  we  agree  with  the  conclusion  of  Maclean  that 
in  Mark  we  come  much  closer  to  the  bed-rock  of  the  gospel 
story  than  in  either  Matthew  or  Luke,i'^2  ^nd  with  the  state- 
ments of  A.  B.  Bruce :  "The  realism  of  Mark  makes  for  its 
historicity.  It  is  a  guarantee  of  first-hand  reports,  such  as 
one  might  expect  from  Peter.  Peter  reverences  his  risen 
Lord  as  much  as  Luke  or  any  other  man.  But  he  is  one  of 
the  men  who  have  been  with  Jesus,  and  he  speaks  from  in- 
delible impressions  made  on  his  eye  and  ear,  while  Luke 
reports  at  second  hand  from  written  accounts  for  the  most 
part.  .  .  .  Mark  is  the  archaic  Gospel,  written  under  the 
inspiration  not  of  prophecy  like  Matthew,  or  of  present 
reverence  like  Luke,  but  of  fondly  cherished  past  memories. 

"'  Compare  Allen,  Commentary  on  Matthew,  pp.  xxxi-xxxiv. 
'"  Hastings's  Dictionary  of  Christ  and  the  Gospels,  vol.  ii,  p.  128. 


i64     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

In  it  we  get  nearest  to  the  human  personality  of  Jesus,  in 
all  its  originality  and  power,  and  as  colored  by  the  time 
and  place.  And  the  character  of  Jesus  loses  nothing  by  the 
realistic  presentation.  Nothing  is  told  which  needed  to  be 
hid.  The  homeliest  facts  reported  by  the  evangelist  only  in- 
crease our  interest  and  our  admiration.  One  who  desires 
to  see  the  Jesus  of  history  truly  should  con  well  the 
pages  of  Mark  first,  then  pass  on  to  Matthew  and  Luke."  ^"^^ 

In  closing  this  study  of  the  second  Gospel  we  could  adopt 
as  our  own  the  words  of  the  Dean  of  Westminster,  J. 
Armitage  Robinson.  "I  hope  that  in  the  light  of  what  I  have 
very  briefly  said  you  will  be  encouraged  to  read  the  Gospel 
according  to  Mark  with  a  fresh  interest  as  the  work  of  a 
single  hand  which  paints  with  broad  strokes  and  bright 
colors  the  earliest  picture  we  possess  of  the  Saviour  of  the 
world."  "4 

As  the  earliest  Gospel,  written  when  the  facts  were  yet 
fresh  in  Peter's  memory ;  as  the  Gospel  resting  upon  Peter's 
authority,  the  authority  of  an  eyewitness;  as  the  Gospel 
which  seems  freest  from  all  philosophical  or  theological  pre- 
possessions, the  second  Gospel  is  generally  recognized  by 
modern  scholars  as  the  most  authentic  and  most  authorita- 
tive of  the  evangelical  narratives ;  and  in  this  conclusion  the 
value  set  upon  Mark  in  the  past  centuries  has  been  exactly 
reversed.  From  being  the  most  neglected  and  the  least 
valued  by  New  Testament  scholars  it  now  ranks  before  all 
others  as  a  historical  source  and  a  reliable  basis  for  all 
further  study. 

VII.  The  Appendix  to  the  Second  Gospel,  Mark  i6.  9-20 

The  question  concerning  these  verses  is.  Did  Mark  write 
them  or  were  they  written  by  some  other  hand?  The 
authorities  are  arrayed  against  each  other  at  this  point. 

*'^  Expositor's  Greek  Testament,  vol.  i,  p.  33. 
"*  Robinson,  The  Study  of  the  Gospels,  p.  36. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  165 

We  make  a  list  of  these,  and  then  look  at  the  reasons 
assigned  for  their  differing  positions. 

1.  The  Authorities.  The  following  are  among  those  who 
believe  that  these  verses  were  written  by  Mark :  Simon,  Mill, 
Grotius,  Bengel,  Scrivener,  Guericke,  Wolf,  Wace,  Storr, 
Kuinoel,  Kiel,  Matthaei,  Scholz,  Stier,  Bisping,  Eichhorn, 
Hug,  Schleiermacher,  DeWette,  Wetstein,  Bleek,  Olshausen, 
Lange,  Ebrard,  Edersheim,  Hilgenfeld,  Salmon,  Words- 
worth, McClellan,  Bickersteth,  Cook,  Campbell,  Ellicott, 
Morison,  Miller,  Burgon.  Scrivener  says,  "We  engage  to 
defend  the  authenticity  of  this  long  and  important  paragraph 
without  the  slightest  misgiving."  ^"^^  Dean  Burgon  has 
written  a  volume  on  the  subject  of  the  genuineness  of  the 
closing  verses  of  Mark  and  his  conclusion  is,  "There  is  not 
a  particle  of  doubt,  not  an  atom  of  suspicion,  attaching  to 
the  last  twelve  verses  of  Mark."  On  the  other  hand  the 
genuineness  of  these  verses  has  been  questioned  by  many, 
and  among  them  the  following  authorities :  Michaelis, 
Griesbach,  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Tregelles,  Schulz, 
Ritschl,  Resch,  Zeller,  Fritzsche,  Credner,  Reuss,  Wieseler, 
Klostermann,  Hofmann,  Holtzmann,  Keim,  Scholten, 
Hitzig,  Schenkel,  Ewald,  Meyer,  Weiss,  Zahn,  Abbott,  Al- 
ford,  Davidson,  Farrar,  Schaff,  Swete,  Salmond,  Thomson, 
Maclean,  Norton,  Godet,  Light  foot,  Luthardt,  Warfield, 
Westcott  and  Hort,  Gregory,  Gould.  There  are  names  of 
able  scholars  in  both  of  these  lists.  Why  is  it  that  they  have 
not  been  able  to  agree  in  their  conclusions  as  to  these  verses? 
The  answer  to  that  question  opens  up  a  very  interesting 
study  in  the  field  of  textual  and  higher  criticism.  There  is 
evidence  for  these  verses  and  there  is  evidence  against 
them,  and  one  must  balance  probabilities  in  reaching  any 
issue. 

2.  The  External  Evidence  in  favor  of  these  verses:  (i) 
They  are  found  in  most  of  the  uncial  manuscripts  and  in  all 

*"  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  New  Testament,  Fourth  edi- 
tion, vol.  i,  p.  337. 


i66     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

of  the  cursives.    In  some  cursives,  however,  they  are  marked 
as  questionable. 

(2)  They  are  found  in  most  of  the  versions,  including  the 
Syriac  in  all  forms  but  one,  the  Latin  in  all  forms  but  one, 
and  all  the  Syriac  and  Greek  lectionaries. 

(3)  They  are  quoted  by  many  of  the  church  Fathers,  pos- 
sibly by  Hermas,  Justin  Martyr,  and  Chrysostom,  and  cer- 
tainly by  Irenseus,  Eusebius,  Macarius,  Epiphanius,  Didy- 
mus,  Nestorius,  Ambrose,  Augustine,  and  the  later  Latin 
writers. 

3.  Other  considerations  favoring  the  genuineness  of  these 
verses :  ( i )  Without  these  verses  the  Gospel  would  end  with 
the  Greek  words  e<f>o[iovvTo  yap,  "for  they  were  being 
afraid."  It  is  extremely  improbable  that  Mark  would  have 
closed  his  book  with  this  note  of  terror,  or  with  a  Greek 
conjunction.  It  is  sometimes  stated  that  Greek  books  never 
end  with  words  of  bad  omen ;  but  there  are  some  which  do, 
and  cases  can  be  cited  where  the  last  word  is  a  particle. 
However,  these  are  very  rare  indeed,  and  it  would  seem 
next  to  impossible  for  Mark  to  have  closed  a  gospel  nar- 
rative, the  story  of  the  good  news  concerning  Jesus,  with 
these  words.  Dr.  Hort  decides  that  "it  is  incredible  that 
the  evangelist  deliberately  concluded  either  a  paragraph  with 
k(po0ovvTo  yap,  or  the  Gospel  with  a  petty  detail  of  a  sec- 
ondary event,  leaving  his  narrative  hanging  in  the  air."  ^^^ 

(2)  If  Mark  did  not  close  his  narrative  at  16.  8,  he  must 
have  written  some  conclusion  of  the  story  which  included 
some  account  of  the  resurrection. 

(3)  It  seems  beyond  belief  that  Mark  should  have  written 
a  conclusion  for  this  Gospel  which  was  lost  and  then 
replaced  with  another  written  by  some  one  else,  and  that 
this  conclusion  should  then  have  been  accepted  everywhere 
as  the  genuine  writing  of  Mark. 

(4)  A  very  plausible  reason  has  been  suggested  for  the 
omission  of  these  verses  in  some  manuscripts.     We  read 

"•  Westcott  and  Hort,  Greek  Testament,  vol.  ii,  notes,  p.  46. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  167 

here,  "These  signs  shall  accompany  them  that  believe:  in 
my  name  shall  they  cast  out  demons ;  they  shall  speak  with 
new  tongues;  they  shall  take  up  serpents,  and  if  they  drink 
any  deadly  thing,  it  shall  in  no  wise  hurt  them."  ^"^"^  Maca- 
rius  Magnes,  about  A.  D.  400,  says  that  the  heathen  were 
challenging  the  Christians  with  these  verses,  saying  to  them : 
"Are  you  Christians?  Do  you  believe?  Can  you  show  us 
the  signs  which  accompany  those  who  believe?  Can  you 
handle  serpents?  Can  you  drink  poison  and  be  in  no  wise 
hurt  by  it?"  It  was  difficult  to  answer  such  questions. 
The  heathen  probably  had  asked  them  from  the  very  begin- 
ning. It  was  easier  to  take  those  verses  out  of  the  Gospel 
according  to  Mark  than  it  was  to  satisfy  the  questioner 
either  by  actual  test  or  plausible  argument.  This  sugges- 
tion favors  the  genuineness  of  these  verses,  and  simply  seeks 
to  account  for  their  omission  in  some  of  the  authorities. 

We  turn  now  to  the  considerations  urged  against  the  gen- 
uineness of  this  appendix  to  the  second  Gospel. 

4.  The  External  Evidence  against  these  verses:  (i)  The 
first  and  most  important  fact  we  meet  in  this  connection  is 
that  the  two  oldest  and  most  authoritative  manuscripts  of 
the  New  Testament  do  not  contain  them.  In  both  the  Sin- 
aiticus  and  Vaticanus  the  Gospel  according  to  Mark  ends 
with  16.  8.  The  same  thing  is  true  of  Codex  Regius.  The 
symbols  of  these  three  codices  are  Aleph,  B,  and  L.  Usu- 
ally the  united  testimony  of  Aleph  and  B  would  be  regarded 
as  sufficient  to  decide  against  the  genuineness  of  any  pas- 
sage in  the  New  Testament  not  found  in  them.  Some  text- 
ual critics  have  thought  that  their  united  testimony  was 
weakened  in  the  present  case  by  certain  considerations  which 
we  will  notice  later. 

(2)  These  verses  are  not  found  in  the  Lewis  palimpsest 
of  the  Syriac  version,  which  Eberhard  Nestle  and  J.  Rendel 
Harris  think  represents  the  first  attempt  to  translate  the  Gos- 
pel into  Syriac,  and  therefore  is  older  than  the  Peshito  or  any 

•"  Mark  16.  17,  18. 


i68     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

other  Syriac  version.  These  verses  also  are  lacking  in  one 
of  the  manuscripts  of  the  Old  Latin  version,  in  one  of  the 
Arabic,  and  in  some  Armenian  and  Ethiopian  versions.  The 
earliest  texts  from  Carthage,  Alexandria,  Palestine,  and 
Syria  omit  these  verses;  and  the  only  second  century  evi- 
dence for  them  comes  from  Italy  and  Gaul. 

(3)  Eusebius  says  that  these  verses  were  not  in  the  "ac- 
curate copies"  of  his  day.^'^^  Jerome  says  they  are  to  be 
found  in  few  Gospels,  "almost  all  the  Greek  copies  not  hav- 
ing it."  1'^  Victor  of  Antioch  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa  bear 
the  same  testimony  to  the  fact  that  the  majority  of  the 
manuscripts  in  their  day  did  not  have  them. 

(4)  They  are  not  mentioned  by  Clement  of  Rome  or 
Clement  of  Alexandria.  However,  this  fact  need  not  weigh 
against  them,  since  these  writers  may  have  had  no  clear 
occasion  to  quote  or  use  them.  Others  among  the  church 
Fathers  we  would  have  expected  to  deal  with  these  verses, 
if  they  had  known  them,  since  their  extant  writings  gave 
them  occasion  to  do  so.  The  argument  from  silence  may 
be  of  more  weight  in  their  case.  Among  these  we  may 
mention  Tertullian,  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  Cyprian,  Athanasius, 
Basil,  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  and 
Theodoret. 

(5)  These  verses  are  not  recognized  by  the  Ammonian 
sections  or  the  Eusebian  canons. 

(6)  A  different,  shorter,  and  spurious  ending  is  found 
in  some  manuscripts  and  versions. 

(7)  A  tenth-century  manuscript  of  the  Armenian  version 
has  these  twelve  verses  with  a  heading,  stating  that  they 
were  written  by  "the  elder  Ariston."  F.  C.  Conybeare,  the 
discoverer  of  this  manuscript,  is  convinced  that  here  we 
have  the  real  author  of  these  verses  named.  Casper  Rene 
Gregory,  Zahn,  Resch,  and  many  others  are  inclined  to  the 
same  opinion.    They  identify  this  Ariston  with  the  Aristion 

'"Ad  Alarin.  Quaest.,  i,  vol.  4. 
^'"AdHedib.  Qu.  2. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  169 

mentioned  by  Papias.  Papias  says  that  Aristion  was  a 
disciple  of  the  Lord,  from  whom  he  learned  many  things 
by  questioning  him.^^o  If  Aristion  wrote  these  words,  his 
authority  was  just  as  good  as  that  of  Mark,  and  we  ought  to 
value  this  appendix  just  as  highly  and  print  it  in  our  Bibles 
with  Aristion's  name  attached. 

So  much  for  the  external  evidence  against  these  verses. 
We  turn  next  to  the  internal  evidence  against  them;  and 
many  scholars  think  that  this  is  by  far  weightier  than  the 
external  evidence  is. 

5.  Internal  Evidence  against  these  verses:  (i)  In  16.  2 
we  find  one  phrase  for  the  first  day  of  the  week,  and  in 
16.  9  a  different  one.  This  may  be  an  indication  of  a  dif- 
ferent author. 

(2)  Verse  9  does  not  follow  well  upon  verse  8.  The 
subject  of  the  verb  in  verse  9  cannot  be  gathered  from 
the  immediate  context,  and  surely  is  not  suggested  by  any- 
thing in  verse  8.  Verse  9  seems,  rather,  to  have  been  taken 
from  some  other  context  and  attached  to  this. 

(3)  In  verse  9  Mary  Magdalene  is  introduced  as  a  new 
character.  She  is  described  as  the  woman  out  of  whom 
Jesus  had  cast  seven  devils.  Now,  Mary  Magdalene  has 
been  mentioned  three  times  before  in  the  Gospel  without  this 
description.  Why  should  this  belated  identification  occur 
at  this  point?  Mary's  name  is  found  in  the  first  verse  of 
this  chapter,  and  Mark  felt  no  necessity  of  identifying  her 
there.  Would  he  at  this  place  ?  Is  there  not  an  evidence  of 
another  hand  in  this  identifying  clause? 

(4)  We  are  assured  that  there  are  eleven  words  and  two 
phrases  in  these  verses  which  Mark  never  uses.  The  vo- 
cabulary is  radically  different  from  his.  There  are  three 
occurrences  of  the  verb  "to  go"  in  these  verses,  nopevoiiai, 
a  very  common  verb  in  the  Greek,  but  strangely  enough 
it  is  not  found  anywhere  in  the  Gospel  according  to  Mark. 
The  demonstrative  pronoun  Uelvo^,    "that,"  is   found  five 

**  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccles.,  iii,  39. 


170     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

times  in  various  forms  in  these  verses,  and  is  used  as  the 
subject  of  the  verb  and  in  other  ways  not  paralleled  any- 
where in  the  Gospel  according  to  Mark  or  in  the  other 
Synoptics.  Do  these  things  prove  that  a  new  writer  with 
a  new  vocabulary  has  written  this  appendix? 

(5)  Gould  says:  "The  argument  from  the  general  char- 
acter of  the  section  is  stronger  still.  It  is  the  mere  sum- 
marizing of  the  appearances  of  the  Lord.  Mark  is  the  most 
vivid  and  picturesque  of  the  evangelists.  He  abbreviates 
discourses  but  amplifies  narratives.  The  first  eight  verses 
of  this  chapter  are  a  good  example  of  Mark's  style  and  in 
striking  contrast  with  the  rest  of  the  chapter."  i^i 

There  are  other  arguments  adduced  against  Mark's 
authorship  of  this  appendix,  but  none  of  them  are  more 
conclusive  than  the  ones  we  have  now  mentioned,  and  we 
may  allow  them  to  stand  as  representative  of  the  list.  The 
differences  in  style  and  vocabulary  are  regarded  by  most 
scholars  as  sufficient  to  make  out  a  case. 

6.  Testimony  of  Aleph  and  B.  These  are  our  two  oldest 
and  most  valuable  manuscripts.  Why  should  not  their 
testimony  be  considered  conclusive  against  these  verses? 
Salmon  has  made  a  very  ingenious  argument  to  show  that 
their  united  testimony  is  not  the  testimony  of  two  witnesses 
at  this  place,  and  that  on  the  whole  their  testimony  is 
not  adverse,  but,  rather,  favorable  to  the  genuineness  of 
the  appendix.  He  shows  (i)  that  the  same  scribe  has 
written  the  close  of  the  Gospel  according  to  Mark  in  both 
these  manuscripts.  That  would  be  a  most  extraordinary 
fact,  and  it  seems  almost  incredible  at  first  thought.  We 
know  nothing  about  the  origin  of  either  of  these  manu- 
scripts, but  we  know  that  the  Vatican  manuscript  has  been 
lying  in  the  Vatican  library  for  many  centuries,  and  we 
know  that  the  Sinaitic  manuscript  lay  in  the  Monastery 
of  Saint  Catherine  on  Mount  Sinai  through  still  longer 
centuries.      The    one    was    the    property   of    the    Roman 

*"  Commentary  on  Mark,  p.  303. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  171 

Catholic  Church  and  the  other  was  the  property  of  the 
Greek  CathoHc  Church.  One  was  in  the  continent  of 
Europe  and  one  in  the  continent  of  Africa.  For  more  than 
a  thousand  years  the  owners  of  each  were  wholly  uncon- 
scious of  the  existence  of  the  other.  Could  it  be  that  the 
same  hand  had  held  them  both  there  in  the  beginning  of 
the  fourth  century,  that  the  same  hand  had  written  certain 
of  their  leaves,  and  that  they  afterward  had  become  separ- 
ated so  widely? 

When  Tischendorf  discovered  the  Sinaitic  manuscript 
near  the  middle  of  the  last  century,  the  whole  world  re- 
joiced that  now  we  had  a  manuscript  of  the  New  Testament 
of  equal  antiquity  with  that  in  the  Vatican  library, 
and  that  upon  the  authority  of  these  two  manuscripts  when 
they  concurred  we  could  be  reasonably  sure  of  a  reliable 
text.  Tischendorf  himself  made  the  discovery  that  in  Aleph 
the  leaf  at  the  close  of  the  Gospel  according  to  Mark  was 
one  of  six  leaves  which  were  different  from  the  leaves 
of  Codex  Aleph  and  were  like  Codex  B.  His  reasons  for  so 
thinking  are  as  follows:  (a)  The  shape  of  certain  letters  in 
these  six  leaves  and  in  Codex  B  is  the  same,  (b)  There  is 
the  same  mode  of  filling  up  the  space  at  the  end  of  the  line, 
(c)  The  manner  of  punctuation  is  the  same,  (d)  The 
manner  of  referring  to  an  insertion  in  the  margin  is  the 
same,  (e)  The  arabesques  or  ornamental  finials  are  the 
same.  (/)  The  words  for  "man,"  "son,"  and  "heaven"  are 
written  in  full  as  in  B,  and  not  abbreviated  as  they  are  else- 
where in  Aleph.  (g)  The  spelling  is  the  same.  On  these 
six  leaves  Pilate  is  spelled  with  "ei,"  while  elsewhere  in 
Aleph  it  is  spelled  with  "i."  John  is  spelled  with  one  "n," 
while  elsewhere  in  Aleph  it  is  spelled  with  two.  Tischendorf 
and  Salmon  were  sure  that  such  an  accumulation  of  indica- 
tions did  not  fall  short  of  a  demonstration. 

Then,  if  the  same  man  wrote  the  close  of  the  Gospel 
according  to  Mark  in  both  of  these  most  ancient  manu- 
scripts, we  have  no  two  witnesses  against  these  verses  when 


172     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

this  single  scribe  chose  to  omit  them  in  both,  but  the  omis- 
sion rests  upon  his  sole  authority.  Did  the  still  more  ancient 
manuscripts  from  which  he  copied  have  these  verses  and 
did  he  omit  them  for  some  reason  of  his  own  unknown  to 
us,  or  were  the  verses  lacking  in  his  authorities  and  did  he 
copy  his  originals  faithfully  just  as  they  were?  It  would 
be  interesting  to  have  some  light  upon  this  matter,  if  it 
could  be  found  in  any  way. 

Salmon  thinks  that  it  can  be  found.  He  points  out  the 
fact  that  in  Aleph  the  last  column  of  the  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  Mark  which  is  filled  from  top  to  bottom  has  in  it  only 
five  hundred  and  sixty  letters,  while  the  first  column  of  the 
Gospel  according  to  Luke  has  six  hundred  and  seventy- 
eight  letters.  Evidently,  for  some  reason  the  scribe  has 
spread  out  his  writing  at  the  close  of  Mark  so  as  to  fill  that 
last  column  and  have  thirty-seven  letters  to  carry  over  into 
a  new  column.  If  he  had  not  done  so,  he  would  have  had  a 
whole  column  blank  between  the  two  Gospels  at  this  point. 
Why  did  he  need  to  spread  out  his  writing  in  this  fashion  in 
order  to  get  something  for  this  final  column  ?  Because,  says 
Salmon,  he  was  evidently  leaving  out  something  which  had 
filled  this  space  in  the  manuscript  or  manuscripts  from 
which  he  copied.  How  about  the  Vatican  manuscript? 
There  is  a  blank  column  following  the  close  of  the  Gospel 
according  to  Mark  in  this  manuscript,  and  it  is  the  only 
blank  column  in  the  whole  New  Testament  manuscript! 
What  can  the  explanation  of  this  blank  column  be?  The 
scribe  must  have  known  that  there  was  something  in  the 
original  which  he  chose  to  leave  out. 

Therefore  Salmon  concludes  (2)  that  both  the  Sinaitic 
and  the  Vatican  manuscripts,  when  cross-examined,  give 
evidence,  not  against,  but  for  the  disputed  verses,  and  afford 
us  reason  to  believe  that  in  this  place  these  manuscripts  do 
not  represent  the  reading  of  their  archetypes,  but  the  critical 
views  of  the  corrector  under  whose  hand  both  passed.^®^ 

"^Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  p.  148. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  MARK  173 

It  does  not  follow,  however,  that  a  blank  column  bears  clear 
evidence  to  a  conscious  omission.  In  the  Vatican  manu- 
script there  are  two  blank  columns  at  the  end  of  Nehemiah 
and  a  column  and  a  half  left  blank  at  the  end  of  Tobit ;  and 
nobody  suspects  that  any  of  the  original  contents  have  been 
omitted  in  either  of  these  places.  In  the  Sinaitic  manuscript 
more  than  two  columns  and  the  whole  of  the  next  following 
page  are  left  blank  at  the  end  of  the  Pauline  Epistles;  and 
at  the  end  of  the  book  of  Acts  a  column  and  two  thirds  with 
the  whole  of  the  next  following  page.  In  the  Alexandrian 
manuscript  a  column  and  a  third  are  left  blank  at  the  end  of 
Mark,  although  it  has  the  appendix,  16.  9-20,  in  full.  No 
one  argues  that  the  scribe  has  consciously  omitted  something 
additional,  because  of  this  blank.  In  this  manuscript  half 
a  page  is  also  left  blank  at  the  end  of  John  and  a  whole 
page  at  the  end  of  the  Pauline  Epistles.  These  facts  show 
that  leaving  a  blank  at  the  end  of  a  book  and  the  size  of  the 
blank  were  matters  lying  wholly  at  the  will  of  the  copyist, 
and  therefore  we  cannot  argue  with  any  certainty  that  the 
blanks  in  either  Aleph  or  B  prove  that  their  scribe  knew  of 
any  other  ending  than  that  he  has  given  us. 

7.  If  we  decide  either  upon  the  external  or  the  internal 
evidence  that  these  closing  verses  were  not  written  by  Mark, 
how  can  we  explain  the  abrupt  ending  of  the  second  Gospel? 
Why  did  not  Mark  write  some  account  of  the  resurrection 
appearances  and  of  the  ascension  of  the  Lord?  Several  sug- 
gestions have  been  made.  They  are,  of  course,  nothing  but 
guesses  in  the  dark.  They  represent  possibilities  and  nothing 
more. 

(i)  Michaelis,  Hug,  and  others  have  thought  that  Mark 
was  interrupted  when  he  had  written  16.  8  by  Peter's  im- 
prisonment or  martyrdom,  or  by  his  own  sickness,  or  by 
some  accident.  Godet  thinks  that  Mark  fled  from  Rome  at 
the  time  of  the  unexpected  outbreak  of  the  Neronian  perse- 
cution and  that  he  left  this  Gospel  behind  him  unfinished. 
However,  if  the  church  tradition  is  a  true  one,  and  Mark 


174     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

lived  long  years  afterward  in  Alexandria,  it  would  seem 
most  improbable  that  he  never  would  have  seen  this  manu- 
script again  and  never  would  have  thought  it  worth  while  to 
complete  the  gospel  story.  We  think  he  must  have  done  so 
at  some  time. 

(2)  Griesbach,  Schulthess,  Schulz,  and  others  have  sug- 
gested that  in  some  way  the  closing  leaf  or  leaves  of  the 
original  Gospel  according  to  Mark  were  lost  after  the  death 
of  Mark  and  that  the  manuscript  as  it  was  preserved  closed 
at  the  bottom  of  a  page  with  16.  8.  Later  some  one  tried  to 
supply  the  omission  with  an  ending  written  by  himself  and 
embodying  the  second  century  tradition  concerning  the 
matters  he  mentioned.  This  seems  more  likely  than  the 
former  hypothesis  that  Mark  never  wrote  any  ending  for 
the  Gospel.  However,  it  seems  strange  that  no  copies  had 
been  made  of  the  original  by  Mark  before  it  was  allowed  to 
fall  into  such  a  dilapidated  state,  and  that  no  tradition  was 
preserved  of  the  original  contents  in  its  verbal  accuracy.  It 
lies  within  the  range  of  possibility  that  some  modern  ex- 
cavator in  Egypt  will  dig  up  out  of  the  desert  sands  for  us 
the  autograph  copy  of  the  original  ending  as  written  by 
Mark !    It  is  a  consummation  devoutly  to  be  desired. 

8.  Conclusions,  (i)  The  genuineness  of  these  tv/elve 
closing  verses  is  to  be  seriously  doubted.  The  differences  in 
style  and  vocabulary  and  other  minor  phenomena  are  suffi- 
cient to  raise  very  serious  questions  as  to  the  possibility  of 
their  authorship  by  Mark.  Our  oldest  manuscripts  and  our 
oldest  version  omit  them. 

(2)  They  may  have  been  written  by  Aristion,  but  we  can- 
not be  sure  of  it.  In  any  case,  the  appendix  must  be  very 
ancient  and  it  represents  the  apostolic  tradition  of  the  second 
century. 

(3)  Until  the  genuine  ending  by  Mark  has  been  discov- 
ered, this  appendix  ought  to  be  printed  in  our  Bibles  with 
a  space  between  it  and  the  Gospel  or  a  note  attached  declar- 
ing its  doubtful  authenticity. 


PART  III 

"THE  MOST  BEAUTIFUL  BOOK  EVER  WRITTEN": 
THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE 


PART  III 

"THE  MOST  BEAUTIFUL  BOOK  EVER  WRITTEN": 
THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE 

I.  THE  AUTHOR 
I.  The  New  Testament  Data 

The  Gospel  according  to  Luke  has  been  said  by  Renan  to 
be  "the  most  beautiful  book  ever  written,"  ^  A  beautiful 
book  is  in  all  probability  the  product  of  a  beautiful  soul. 
The  most  beautiful  book  ever  written,  especially  since  it 
deals  with  spiritual  themes  and  is  the  story  of  The  Perfect 
Life,  must  have  had  an  author  worthy  of  our  most  intimate 
acquaintance,  a  man  of  noble  soul  and  adequate  training, 
interesting  to  us  in  every  detail  of  his  career  and  in  every 
phase  of  his  character. 

We  would  like  to  know  all  about  Homer  and  all  about 
Shakespeare,  or  at  least  as  much  as  we  know  about  Martin 
Luther  and  John  Wesley ;  but  the  multitude  of  details  con- 
cerning the  private  and  the  public  life  of  Luther  and  Wesley 
utterly  fail  us  when  we  come  to  these  greatest  geniuses  of 
our  literature.  We  know  comparatively  little  about  the  per- 
sonal life  of  Homer  or  of  Shakespeare,  and  we  know  com- 
paratively little  about  the  author  of  this  "most  beautiful 
book  ever  written."  Jesus  we  know,  and  Peter  we  know, 
and  John  we  know,  and  Paul  we  know,  and  we  know  some- 
thing of  most  of  the  twelve  apostles  and  of  many  of  the 
deacons  and  evangelists  of  the  early  church;  and  we  owe 
most  of  our  knowledge  of  these  men  to  the  evangelist  Luke. 
We  owe  more  of  it  to  him  than  to  any  other  man  who  ever 

'  Renan,  Les  Evangiles,  p.  283,  "C'est  le  plus  beau  livre  qu'il  y  ait." 

^77 


178     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

lived  or  wrote  about  them.  But  Luke  tells  us  little  or 
nothing  about  himself.  He  never  mentions  his  own  name 
either  in  the  Gospel  or  in  the  book  of  Acts.  He  makes  one 
reference  to  himself  in  the  use  of  the  personal  pronoun  in 
the  preface  to  the  Gospel,  "It  seemed  good  to  me  also  to 
write,"2  and  the  use  of  the  plural  pronouns  "we"  and  "us" 
in  the  book  of  Acts  has  been  generally  supposed  to  indicate 
the  entrance  of  Luke  himself  upon  the  scene. 

Luke's  name,  however,  appears  only  three  times  in  the 
New  Testament :  in  Philem.  24,  "Mark,  Aristarchus,  Demas, 
Luke,  my  fellow  workers"  salute  you;  Col.  4.  14,  "Luke,  the 
beloved  physician,  and  Demas  salute  you,"  and  2  Tim.  4. 
10,  II,  where  after  declaring,  "Demas  forsook  me,  having 
loved  this  present  world,"  Paul  adds,  "Only  Luke  is  with 
me."  We  notice  that  in  each  of  these  three  passages  Luke 
and  Demas  are  mentioned  together,  Demas  being  a  fellow 
worker  in  the  first  two  passages,  but  having  forsaken  Paul 
in  the  last  of  them,  while  Luke  alone  remained  faithful 
and  present  with  him.  It  is  also  worth  noticing  that  in  the 
immediate  context  of  each  of  these  passages  the  name  of  the 
other  evangelist  and  author  of  a  Gospel  narrative  who  was 
not  an  apostle  occurs.  Mark  is  mentioned  in  Philem.  24; 
Col.  4.  10;  and  2  Tim.  4.  11. 

Upon  the  basis  of  these  three  passages  in  which  his  name 
occurs  what  facts  may  we  glean  concerning  the  author  of 
the  most  beautiful  book  in  all  literature? 

2.  The  Name  "Luke" 

We  begin  with  the  name  itself.  ( i )  "Luke,"  in  the  Greek, 
AovKdg,  is  a  very  uncommon  name.  We  are  told  that  it  is 
not  to  be  found  in  the  writings  of  any  classical  author  or 
upon  any  Greek  or  Latin  inscription,  and  that  it  does  not 
occur  before  New  Testament  times.  It  is  a  peculiar  name, 
distinctive  by  its  very   strangeness  and   in  frequency.     It 

*Luke  I.  3. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  179 

seems  to  be  a  contracted  or  shortened  form  of  "Lucanus,"  in 
the  Greek  AovKavoq  (which  is  found  in  inscriptions),  as 
"Apollos"  was  a  shortened  form  of  "ApoUonius,"  and 
"Silas"  of  "Silvanus."  ^  These  three  men,  Lucas,  Apollos, 
and  Silas,  were  all  friends  of  the  apostle  Paul,  and  in  their 
ministry  with  him  they  must  have  been  thrown  into  intimate 
association  with  each  other ;  and  they  all  had  nicknames,  or, 
rather,  shortened  and  abbreviated  names  by  which  they 
were  called  in  preference  to  the  full  name,  which  was  too 
long  for  common  or  familiar  use.*  In  the  earliest  copies  of 
the  Latin  Bible  the  name  "Lucanus"  frequently  occurs  in 
the  title  of  the  Gospel,  "Cata  Lucanum." 

(2)  Dean  Plumptre  has  called  attention  to  the  fact  that 
the  only  other  noted  man  of  this  immediate  period  in  history 
who  bore  the  name  "Lucanus"  was  the  Latin  poet,  the 
author  of  the  "Pharsalia,"  the  epic  poem  which  set  forth  the 
struggle  between  Julius  Caesar  and  Pompey  for  the  supreme 
power  at  Rome.^  Now,  this  Lucanus  was  born  in  the  year 
A.  D.  39,  and  therefore  he  was  probably  thirty  or  forty  years 
younger  than  our  Luke,  the  author  of  the  third  Gospel. 
Dean  Plumptre  has  made  this  further  most  interesting  sug- 
gestion :  that  it  is  just  possible  that  the  poet  Lucanus  was 
named  after  the  physician  Luke.  If  Luke  were  a  beloved 
physician  in  the  family  when  the  boy  Lucanus  was  born, 
the  father  and  mother  may  have  decided  to  show  their  ap- 


*  Ramsay  and  Deissmann  are  convinced  by  recent  discoveries 
of  inscriptions  in  Asia  Minor  that  Aoi/xai  is  the  equivalent  of  AoiJicioj, 
which  corresponds  to  the  Latin  name  "Lucius."  See  Ramsay,  The 
Bearing  of  Recent  Discovery  on  the  Trustworthiness  of  the  New 
Testament,  chap.  xxv. 

*  Other  examples  are:  "Amplias"  for  "Ampliatus"  (Rom.  16.  8), 
"Olympas"  for  "Olympiodorus"  (Rom.  16.  15),  "Demas"  for  "De- 
metrius" (Col.  4.  14),  "Epaphras"  for  "Epaphroditus"  (Col.  4.  12), 
"Zenas"  for  "Zenodorus"  (Titus  3.  13),  "Antipas"  for  "Antipatris" 
(Rev.  2.  13),  "Stephanas"  for  "Stephanephorus"  (i  Cor.  16.  15). 
See  Dictionary  of  Christ  and  the  Gospels,  ii,  p.  83. 

'  Books  of  the  Bible.     New  Testament,  pp.  74,  75. 


i8o     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

preciation  of  him  and  his  services  by  naming  the  child  after 
him.  Every  physician  is  Hkely  to  have  namesakes,  given 
him  in  just  this  way. 

Is  there  any  good  reason  for  supposing  that  there  was  any 
personal  relation  between  these  two  Lukes  in  this  period  of 
history?  Yes,  for  if  Luke  the  physician  and  Lucanus  the 
poet  were  lifelong  friends,  and  the  physician  was  on  intimate 
and  trusted  terms  of  familiarity  with  the  poet's  family,  then 
Luke  would  be  sure  to  make  them  acquainted  with  his  be- 
loved master,  Paul,  and  through  Luke  they  would  be  sure 
to  hear  about  and  to  become  more  or  less  interested  in  Paul's 
preaching  and  Paul's  apostolic  career.  Have  we  any  indica- 
tions of  any  such  acquaintanceship  with  or  interest  in  Paul 
on  the  part  of  any  members  of  the  family  of  Lucanus  ? 

a.  In  the  eighteenth  chapter  of  Acts  we  read  that  the 
Jews  in  Corinth  seized  the  apostle  Paul  and  brought  him 
before  the  proconsul  of  Achaia,  whose  name  was  Gallio,  and 
charged  him  with  persuading  men  to  worship  God  contrary 
to  the  law.  When  Paul  was  about  to  make  answer  to  that 
charge  Gallio  interrupted  him  and  told  the  Jews  that  if  Paul 
had  been  guilty  of  any  criminal  behavior  he  would  try 
him ;  but  if  he  were  simply  preaching  a  new  form  of  Jewish 
doctrine,  that  was  a  matter  upon  which  he  did  not  choose 
to  sit  in  judgment.  Then  he  drove  them  from  the  judg- 
ment seat,  and  they  were  a  most  disappointed  and  angry 
set  of  men.6  They  had  expected  Gallio  to  put  Paul  in  prison 
or  to  stop  his  evangelistic  work  in  one  way  or  another. 
They  found  him  seemingly  favorable  to  the  prisoner  and 
indisposed  to  interfere  in  any  way  with  his  mission  and 
teaching.  What  was  the  explanation  of  this  indifference  to 
the  complaints  of  the  Jews  and  this  willingness  to  befriend 
their  prisoner,  Paul?  This  Gallio  was  the  uncle  of  Lucanus 
the  poet.  Had  Luke  the  evangelist  told  Luke  the  poet  all 
about  Paul  and  his  work,  and  had  Luke  the  poet  told  his 

*Acts  i8.  12-17. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  i8i 

uncle  Gallio  enough  of  these  things  to  prejudice  him  in 
Paul's  favor  ?    That  would  seem  to  be  possible  at  least, 

b.  Then  in  the  time  of  Augustine  and  Jerome  fourteen 
letters  were  extant  which  were  supposed  to  have  passed 
between  the  Latin  philosopher  Seneca  and  the  apostle  Paul. 
Those  which  have  come  down  to  our  day  have  been  pro- 
nounced spurious,  but  at  that  time  they  were  believed  to  be 
genuine,  and  that  very  belief  bore  witness  to  the  fact  that 
there  was  a  widespread  tradition  in  the  early  church  that 
there  had  been  some  personal  acquaintance  and  intercourse 
between  Seneca  and  Paul.  Seneca  was  an  official  in  the 
court  of  Nero  while  Paul  was  a  prisoner  at  Rome.  We 
read  that  Paul's  Gospel  became  known  through  the  whole 
Praetorian  guard,'^  and  that  certain  members  of  Caesar's 
household  were  converted,^  and  it  is  altogether  probable 
that  Seneca  would  hear  about  these  things  and  would  be  in- 
terested to  talk  with  such  a  man  as  Paul  had  proved  him- 
self to  be. 

Bishop  Light  foot  has  written  an  essay  on  Saint  Paul  and 
Seneca,^  in  which  he  has  made  a  most  interesting  collection 
of  the  coincidences  in  thought  and  in  language  to  be  found 
in  the  extant  and  genuine  writings  of  these  two  men;  and 
if  these  coincidences  are  not  sufficient  to  prove  that  the  two 
men  knew  each  other  and  were  acquainted  with  each  other's 
views,  they  go  very  far,  at  least,  toward  making  that  sup- 
position probable.  Now,  Seneca  was  another  uncle  of 
Lucanus  the  poet.  If  Luke  the  evangelist  was  on  terms  of 
intimacy  with  the  members  of  this  family,  we  could  find  in 
that  fact  an  explanation  of  the  actual  friendliness  of 
Gallio  and  of  the  traditional  friendship  of  Seneca  for  the 
apostle  Paul.  The  name  of  the  evangelist  Luke,  then,  un- 
common as  it  is,  and  having  only  one  parallel  in  the  history 
of  this  time,  may  furnish  a  suggestive  link  with  the  family 

'Phil.  I.  13. 
*  Phil.  4.  22. 
°  Commentary  on  Phih'ppians,  pp.  270-333. 


i82     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

of  the  poet  Lucanus  and  so  help  us  to  explain  the  recorded 
and  traditional  relations  between  certain  members  of  this 
family  and  the  apostle  Paul. 

3.  Luke,  the  Companion  of  Paul 

We  turn  back  to  the  three  passages  in  which  Luke's  name 
occurs  and  we  find  that  they  all  bear  witness  to  another  fact 
concerning  him,  namely,  that  he  was  for  a  part  of  his  life, 
at  least,  the  close  companion  of  the  apostle  Paul,  (i)  We 
have  noticed  that  at  certain  points  in  the  narrative  of  the 
book  of  Acts  the  pronoun  "we"  occurs.  It  is  understood 
usually  that  this  pronoun  marks  the  entrance  of  Luke  him- 
self upon  the  scene.  If  so,  Paul  finds  Luke  at  Troas  and 
takes  him,  with  Timothy  and  Silas,  into  Macedonia  on  the 
first  foreign  missionary  journey  from  the  continent  of  Asia 
into  the  continent  of  Europe.^^  Here  Paul  seems  to  have 
left  Luke  in  charge  of  the  church  at  Philippi,  since  the  pro- 
noun "they"  takes  the  place  of  the  pronoun  "we"  in  Acts 
17.  I  and  the  narrative  following.  This  was  in  A.  D.  51. 
Seven  years  later,  in  A.  D.  58,  Paul  finds  Luke  again  here 
at  Philippi,^!  and  Luke  goes  with  Paul  on  his  journey  to 
Jerusalem.i2  jjg  ^^s  with  Paul  at  the  time  of  his  arrest 
and  went  with  him  to  Caesarea.  He  remained  with  him  dur- 
ing the  two  years  of  the  Caesarean  imprisonment  and  ac- 
companied him  on  the  voyage  to  Rome.  At  the  close  of  the 
narrative  of  the  book  of  Acts  Luke  is  still  with  Paul;  and 
from  2  Tim.  4.  1 1  we  learn  that  he  was  Paul's  sole  remaining 
companion  at  the  time  of  the  writing  of  that  epistle.  He 
probably  stayed  at  his  master's  side  to  the  day  of  Paul's 
martyrdom. 

Are  there  any  other  Scriptures,  except  these  passages  in 
which  his  name  occurs  or  the  pronoun  "we"  discloses  his 
presence,  in  which  we  may  have  any  gUmpse  of  Luke's  min- 

"  Acts  16.  10.    This  was  the  second  missionary  journey  of  Paul. 
"Acts  20.  5,  6. 
"Acts  21.  15-18. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  183 

istry?  (2)  It  has  been  suggested  by  Epiphanius^^  t^^t  Luke 
was  one  of  the  seventy  sent  out  by  our  Lord  as  the  fore- 
runners in  his  village  ministry.^*  Probably  the  only  reason 
for  such  a  suggestion  is  that  Luke  is  the  only  one  of  the 
synoptics  who  has  made  any  extended  record  of  this  evan- 
gelistic tour. 

(3)  Theophylact^'5  thought  that  Luke  was  the  unnamed 
companion  of  Cleopas  in  his  walk  to  Emmaus  on  the  resur- 
rection day.  This  narrative  too  is  peculiar  to  the  third 
Gospel;  but  if  Luke  were  a  Gentile,  as  we  shall  have  reason 
to  conclude,  that  fact  would  rule  out  either  of  these  possi- 
bilities. The  seventy  were,  of  course,  all  Jews;  and  the 
companion  of  Cleopas  and  resident  of  his  home  was  a  Jew- 
ess or  a  Jew. 

(4)  It  has  been  conjectured  that  Luke  was  one  of  the 
Greeks  who  asked  to  be  introduced  to  Jesus  at  the  time  of 
the  last  feast  in  Jerusalem,^®  but  even  this  suggestion  does 
not  seem  to  come  within  the  realm  of  possibility,  for  Luke 
declares  in  the  preface  to  his  Gospel  that  he  is  about  to 
record  what  eyewitnesses  had  reported  to  him,  and  thus 
clearly  places  himself  among  those  who  were  wholly  de- 
pendent upon  tradition  for  what  they  knew  of  the  gospel 
story.  If  he  had  been  an  eyewitness  himself  at  any  point, 
he  surely  would  have  claimed  firsthand  authority  for  his 
narrative  in  that  place.  He  makes  no  such  claim.  We  con- 
clude, therefore,  that  he  belonged  to  the  second  generation 
of  believers  and  that  he  himself  never  saw  Jesus. 

(5)  However,  in  2  Cor.  8.  18,  19,  Paul  speaks  of  some 
brother  whose  praise  in  the  gospel  was  spread  through  all 
the  churches  and  who  had  been  appointed  by  the  churches 
to  travel  with  him,  collecting  money  for  the  poor  saints  in 
Jerusalem.     This  unnamed  brother  may  have  been  Luke. 

'*  Bishop  of  Salamis,  in  Cyprus,  Adv.  Haer.,  2,77  A.  D. 
"  Luke  10.  1-20. 

"  Archbishop  of  Albanians  and  Bulgarians,  1077  A.  D. 
"John  12.  20. 


i84     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

He  traveled  with  Paul  on  so  many  other  occasions,  and  he 
went  with  Paul  when  this  collection  was  finally  carried  to 
Jerusalem.  If  he  had  labored  in  its  gathering,  he  deserved 
to  have  some  share  in  its  distribution ;  or  he  may  have  been 
intrusted  to  see  it  safely  to  its  destination.  Anyway,  we  are 
sure  from  our  Scriptures  that  Luke  was  the  close  and  con- 
genial companion  of  the  apostle  Paul. 

They  must  have  liked  each  other,  because  they  were  like 
spirits.  They  were  both  educated  men,  with  scholarly 
habits  and  with  literary  and  cultured  tastes.  They  were 
great-hearted,  liberal-minded,  broad-spirited.  They  must 
have  influenced  and  strengthened  each  other  in  the  develop- 
ment of  their  natural  tendencies.  They  probably  were 
about  the  same  age,  and  they  must  have  been  drawn  to 
each  other  from  their  first  meeting,  and  their  continued 
and  lifelong  friendship  proved  their  perfect  congeniaUty. 
Philip  Schaff  thinks  that  they  were  foreordained  to  be 
comrades,!'^  and  he  points  out  other  notable  friendships 
in  church  history,  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation  between 
Luther  and  Melanchthon,  Zwingli  and  CEcolampadius,  Cal- 
vin and  Beza,  Cranmer,  Latimer,  and  Ridley;  and  in  the 
eighteenth  century  between  the  two  Wesleys  and  Whitefield ; 
and  then  in  this  same  apostolic  period  between  Peter  and 
Mark.  The  Master  sent  out  the  apostles  in  the  beginning 
two  by  two;  and  this  recognized  necessity  for  companion- 
ship and  encouragement  in  the  formative  period  of  the 
church  has  manifested  itself  in  all  the  great  creative  periods 
in  church  history  since  that  time. 

No  one  ever  will  be  able  to  estimate  how  much  service 
to  the  cause  of  Christ  these  congenial  companionships  be- 
tween Christian  colaborers  have  been.  It  may  be  that  we 
owe  to  them  the  very  existence  of  two  of  our  four  Gospels. 
Two  of  these  Gospels  were  written  by  apostles — that  accord- 
ing to  Matthew  and  that  according  to  John.  The  other 
two   were   written   by   the  two  congenial   companions   of 

"  Jiistory  of  the  Christian  Church,  vol.  i,  p.  649. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  185 

the  two  greatest  apostles,  Peter  and  Paul.  It  is  usually 
supposed  that  Mark's  record  of  the  life  of  Jesus  was 
the  first  to  be  written,  and  that  it  was  in  some  sense  a 
summary  of  the  teaching  and  preaching  of  Peter,  whose 
interpreter  and  companion  and  "son"  in  the  gospel 
Mark  was.^®  Peter  and  Mark  were  both  men  of  sanguine 
temperament.  They  were  both  men  of  restless  energy, 
ready  to  jump  at  conclusions  rather  than  to  take  time  to 
reason  them  out.  They  were  both  liable  to  make  mistakes, 
and  they  were  both  ready  to  repent  as  soon  as  they  realized 
that  a  mistake  had  been  made.  Paul  never  could  have  en- 
dured steady  companionship  with  a  man  like  John  Mark. 
He  would  rather  part  company  with  Barnabas  than  keep 
company  with  him.^^  But  Peter  and  Mark  were  a  con- 
genial pair,  and  the  Gospel  record  written  by  Mark  repre- 
sents these  two  men  in  its  general  characteristics,  brief, 
energetic,  full  of  action,  and  unliterary  as  it  is.  On  the  con- 
trary, the  Gospel  written  by  Luke  is  the  longest  and  the  most 
literary  of  the  Gospels.  It  was  the  product  of  the  cultured 
and  congenial  companion  of  the  apostle  Paul.  Possibly, 
however,  there  was  a  still  better  or  more  imperative  rea- 
son than  mere  personal  pleasure  in  comradeship  to  account 
for  the  close  connection  existing  for  years  between  the 
apostle  Paul  and  his  traveling  companion,  Luke. 

4.  Luke,  the  Physician 

We  turn  again  to  Col.  4.  14  and  we  find  that  Paul  not 
only  calls  Luke  "beloved,"  but  his  "beloved  physician,"  and 
we  recall  that  just  before  Luke  joined  Paul  at  Troas  in  that 
first  missionary  advance  into  the  continent  of  Europe  Paul 
had  been  suffering  from  some  infirmity  of  the  flesh  in 
Galatia,^*'  and  it  may  well  have  been  that  he  was  dreading  a 
recurrence  of  that  experience  and  asked  Luke  to  go  along 

"  I  Pet.  5.  13. 
"Acts  15.  37-40- 
"Gal.  4.  13. 


i86     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

with  him  to  help  to  ward  it  off  or  to  care  for  him  if  he  were 
again  disabled  by  it.  We  recall  also  that  when  Luke  rejoins 
Paul  at  Philippi  and  accompanies  him  on  the  last  voyage  to 
Jerusalem  it  is  just  after  Paul  has  been  suffering  again  from 
an  affliction  in  which  he  had  even  despaired  of  his  life.^^ 
From  this  time  on  Luke  remains  constantly  at  his  side. 
Paul  doubtless  needed  the  continuous  attention  of  a  physi- 
cian during  these  closing  years  of  his  life. 

Luke  was  an  attendant  physician,  but,  more  than  that,  he 
was  Paul's  beloved  companion  and  friend.  That  fact  throws 
a  deal  of  light  upon  his  character  and  goes  far  to  make  him 
a  model  for  all  men  in  his  profession.  Luke  must  have 
been  thoroughly  competent,  or  Paul  would  not  have  trusted 
him.  We  want  the  men  into  whose  hands  we  put  the  preser- 
vation of  our  lives  to  have  the  best  education  which  the 
schools  can  furnish  them  and  plenty  of  practical  experience 
before  they  begin  to  make  any  experiments  upon  us.  Now, 
the  best  medical  education  in  Paul's  day  was  to  be  found 
among  the  Greeks,  and  all  of  the  great  medical  authorities 
among  the  Greeks  whose  works  are  extant  were  Greeks  of 
Asia  Minor.  Hippocrates  can  scarcely  be  called  an  excep- 
tion, for  he  was  born  and  lived  on  the  island  of  Cos,  off  the 
coast  of  Caria.  Galen  came  from  Pergamus  in  Mysia, 
Dioscorides  from  Anazarba  in  CiHcia,  and  Aretseus  from 
Cappadocia.  These  were  the  great  masters  in  the  medical 
profession,  and  they  were  all  Asiatic  Greeks. 

The  great  university  in  Asia  Minor  in  Luke's  day  was  sit- 
uated at  Tarsus,  which  was  the  home  of  Paul.  There  was 
no  other  place  in  Asia  Minor  or  in  the  world  of  that  day 
where  Luke  could  get  as  good  a  medical  education  as  he 
could  at  Tarsus.  If  he  went  to  school  there,  he  may  have 
met  Paul  either  in  the  university  or  on  the  streets  of  that 
city;  and  if  they  became  schoolboy  friends  and  discovered 
their  congeniality  of  spirit  in  those  early  days  before  either 
of  them  had  been  converted  to  the  Christian  faith,  it  would 

"2  Cor.  I.  9. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  187 

go  far  to  explain  their  immediate  union  of  fortunes  and 
communion  of  interests  when  they  met  in  after  years  at 
Troas.  Paul  knew  that  Luke  was  a  thoroughly  educated 
and  competent  physician  and  was  willing  to  trust  the  treat- 
ment of  his  case  in  his  hands  without  any  hesitation.  If 
he  had  known  Luke  in  Tarsus  in  early  youth,  and  had 
known  all  about  his  university  training  there,  at  Troas  he 
would  learn  all  about  Luke's  experience  as  a  physician  in  the 
long  years  which  had  elapsed  since  those  university  days. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  Luke  must  have  practiced 
medicine,  for  a  time  at  least,  on  one  of  the  vessels  plying  up 
and  down  the  Mediterranean,  since  he  shows  such  an  ac- 
curate acquaintance  with  technical  nautical  terms  in  his 
description  of  the  voyage  and  the  shipwreck  in  the  twenty- 
seventh  chapter  of  the  book  of  Acts.  We  already  have 
found  reason  to  suppose  that  he  may  have  been  the  trusted 
physician  in  the  family  of  Lucanus  the  poet,  and  so  have 
come  into  contact  with  such  men  as  Gallic  and  Seneca.  He 
may  have  been  the  physician  as  well  as  the  friend  of  Theo- 
philus,  the  man  for  whom  he  wrote  his  two  volumes  of 
history;  and  this  Theophilus  must  have  been  a  man  of  in- 
fluence and  prominence  in  the  Christian  Church  of  the  early 
days.  We  shall  see  later  that  Luke  may  have  had  confiden- 
tial relations  as  physician  with  certain  members  of  the  royal 
court  in  Palestine.  All  the  indications  agree  in  leading  us 
to  the  conclusion  that  Luke  had  had  a  varied  and  an  unusu- 
ally successful  career  as  a  physician  after  leaving  school  and 
before  joining  Paul  at  Troas. 

He  had  had  most  excellent  training  in  the  beginning,  and 
now  he  had  years  of  experience  behind  him.  He  was  no 
longer  young  and  untried.  Paul  was  more  ready  to  trust 
him  on  that  account. 

Luke  was  a  Greek,  of  the  race  of  -i^sculapius  and  Hip- 
pocrates. He  had  the  Greek  g^ft  of  a  joyous  disposition,  a 
pleasant  manner,  a  lovable  personality.  He  was  the  be- 
loved physician  because  of  his  personal  character.     Paul 


i88     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

loved  him,  however,  not  only  because  he  was  a  trained  and 
trusted  and  agreeable  physician,  but  also  because  he  was  a 
Christian,  a  missionary,  an  evangelist.  His  praise  was  in 
all  the  churches  for  his  good  work  in  all  these  fields.  He 
was  beloved  for  his  medical  skill  and  for  his  ever  aggressive 
and  ever  attractive  Christianity.  He  might  well  be  a  model 
for  all  in  the  medical  profession.  There  is  a  Latin  stanza 
which  appraises  his  worth  in  this  twofold  capacity  as  fol- 
lows: 

"Lucas,  Evangelii  et  medicinae  munera  pandens; 

Artibus  hinc,  illinc  religione,  valet : 
Utilis  ille  labor,  per  quem  vixere  tot  segri; 
Utilior,  per  quem  tot  didicere  mori  1"  ^ 

5.  Luke,  the  Musician 

Have  we  now  the  complete  picture  of  Luke  the  beloved 
physician  as  far  as  the  Scriptures  can  help  us  to  form  one? 
Are  there  any  other  personal  characteristics  of  which  they 
make  us  reasonably  sure?  When  we  turn  to  Luke's  own 
writings  I  think  they  will  testify  to  at  least  one  more  feature 
of  Luke's  equipment  as  a  physician  and  as  an  evangelist. 

He  was  a  man  who  was  fond  of  music.  He  is  the  first 
great  Christian  hymnologist.  He  has  preserved  for  us  five 
great  hymns  of  the  early  church.  He  is  the  only  evangelist 
who  has  done  that.  His  gospel  narrative  begins  with  hymns 
and  ends  with  praises.  Now,  music  and  medicine  always 
go  well  together  and  singing  and  salvation  always  have 
gone  hand  in  hand. 

The  Old  Testament  was  full  of  singing  and  it  has  a  hymn 
book  in  its  heart.  Luke  believed  that  those  Old  Testa- 
ment hymns  could  be  adapted  to  Christian  uses.  He  car- 
ries the  hymnology  of  the  Old  Testament  church  over  into 
the  New.  He  is  the  father  and  the  founder  of  Christian 
hymnology.    Bishop  Keble  says  of  Luke: 


Schaff,  op.  cit.,  p.  648. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  189 

"Thou  hast  an  ear  for  angel  songs, 

A  breath  the  gospel  trump  to  fill, 
And  taught  by  thee  the  church  prolongs, 
Her  hymns  of  high  thanksgiving  still." 

He  shows  us  how  the  very  beginning  of  the  Christian  era 
was  ushered  in  with  songs,  and  how  the  Christian  Church 
sang  its  way  through  its  earliest  triumphs.  When  Paul 
and  Silas  had  been  cast  into  the  inner  prison  and  their  feet 
were  made  fast  in  the  stocks,  at  midnight  they  sang  praises 
unto  God  until  an  earthquake  opened  their  prison  doors  and 
everyone's  bands  were  loosed.  We  often  have  wondered 
if  those  hymns  which  Paul  and  Silas  sang  were  not  com- 
posed by  Luke.  Timothy  and  Luke  were  with  Paul  and 
Silas  there  at  Philippi.  They  may  have  been  keeping  their 
midnight  vigil  just  outside  the  prison  walls,  and  when  they 
heard  the  prisoners  singing  some  of  Luke's  gospel  hymns 
they  knew  that  imprisonment  had  not  daunted  the  spirits 
of  those  apostles  of  God's  grace. 

Luke  was  full  of  music  himself.  He  collected  and  recorded 
the  first  Christian  hymns.  He  gave  Paul  medicine  when  he 
needed  it,  and  when  all  medicines  had  failed,  like  another 
David  before  another  Saul,  he  ministered  to  him  in  melody 
until  his  physical  ills  and  his  spiritual  wounds  were  all 
healed.  He  must  have  been  a  versatile  genius,  this  man 
Luke,  ready  to  serve  and  able  to  serve  according  to  any 
man's  need.  No  wonder  that  he  was  beloved  by  all,  and  his 
praise  was  in  all  the  churches. 

6.  Luke,  the  Artist 

From  church  tradition  we  may  add  another  accomplish- 
ment to  this  many-sided  man.  Dante  Gabriel  Rossetti  has 
put  this  church  tradition  into  his  lines : 

"Give  honor  unto  Luke,  evangelist. 
For  he  it  was,  the  ancient  legends  say, 
Who  first  taught  Art  to  fold  her  hands  and  pray."** 


Sonnet  Ixxiv.     In  the  House  of  Life. 


I90     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Luke  was  said  to  have  painted  the  portrait  of  the  Virg^n.^* 
The  oldest  witness  to  this  fact  is  Theodorus  Lector,  who 
was  reader  in  the  Church  of  Constantinople  in  the  sixth 
century.  He  tells  us  that  the  Empress  Eudoxia  found  at 
Jerusalem  a  picture  of  the  God-Mother  painted  by  Luke  the 
apostle  and  she  presented  it  to  her  daughter,  Pulcheria,  the 
wife  of  Theodosius  II,  about  440  A.  D.  In  the  Capella 
Paolina,  in  the  Church  of  Santa  Maria  Maggiore,  at  Rome, 
a  very  ancient  picture  is  preserved,  a  portrait  of  the  Virgin 
ascribed  to  Luke.  It  can  be  traced  back  to  A.  D.  847,  and 
it  may  be  much  older  than  that. 

In  the  catacombs  there  is  an  inscription  referring  to  a 
rude  painting  of  the  Virgin  as  "one  of  seven  painted  by 
Luca."  This  inscription  may  be  the  source  of  the  later 
traditions.  Or  they  may  all  have  sprung  from  the  fact  that, 
as  Plummer  says:  "Luke  has  had  a  great  influence  upon 
Christian  art,  of  which  in  a  real  sense  he  may  be  called  the 
founder.  'The  Shepherd  with  the  Lost  Sheep  on  His 
Shoulder,'  one  of  the  earliest  representations  of  Christ, 
comes  from  Luke  15;  and  both  mediaeval  and  modern  artists 
have  been  specially  fond  of  representing  those  scenes  which 
are  described  by  Luke  alone :  the  annunciation,  the  visit  of 
Mary  to  Elisabeth,  the  shepherds,  the  manger,  the  presenta- 
tion in  the  temple,  Simeon  and  Anna,  Christ  with  the  doc- 
tors, the  woman  at  the  supper  of  Simon  the  Pharisee, 
Christ  weeping  over  Jerusalem,  the  walk  to  Emmaus,  the 
good  Samaritan,  the  prodigal  son.  Many  other  scenes  which 
are  favorites  with  painters  might  be  added  from  the 
Acts."  25  Luke,  says  Philip  Schaff,  "is  the  painter  of 
Christus  Salvator  and  Christus  Consolator."  26 

He  may  not  have  been  an  artist  with  his  brush,  but  we 
know  that  he  was  an  artist  with  his  pen.  He  composed  a 
book  which  a  competent  critic  declares  to  be  the  most  beauti- 

^  Plummer,  International  Critical  Commentary  on  Luke,  p.  xxii. 
**  Plummer,  op.cit.,  p.  xxii. 
"  Schaff,  op.  cit.,  p.  660. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  191 

ful  book  ever  written.  In  it  he  has  portrayed  the  Virgin 
Mary  and  her  Sinless  Son  and  many  other  characters  most 
beautiful  and  rare.  He  had  an  artist's  soul.  He  loved  the 
good  and  beautiful  and  true.  He  may  have  used  the  artist's 
tools.  It  would  make  him  a  very  versatile  genius  indeed,  if 
he  were  a  competent  physician  and  an  accomplished  musi- 
cian and  a  painter  of  pictures  besides.  But  we  have  known 
just  such  versatile  men  again  and  again  in  the  course  of  the 
centuries.  Luke  may  have  been  one  of  them.  We  know 
that  he  was  an  extraordinary  man  in  many  respects ;  and  we 
know  that  if  he  never  put  any  portraits  on  canvas,  he  has 
put  them  on  his  written  page  with  such  artistic  excellence 
that  he  may  safely  be  said  to  be  the  founder  of  Christian  art. 

7.  Luke,  the  Gentile 
We  have  suggested  that  Luke  was  in  all  probability  a  Gen- 
tile. Our  reasons  for  so  concluding  are  not  absolutely  com- 
pelling ones.  They  seem  to  establish  the  dominant  prob- 
ability in  the  case.  They  are  as  follows:  (i)  Luke's  name 
is  Greek. 

(2)  His  style  is  more  like  that  of  a  Greek  than  a  Jew. 
Philip  Schaff  declares  that  his  writing  is  admirably  suited 
to  the  Greek  taste,  and  that  the  prologue  to  the  Gospel  would 
at  once  captivate  the  refined  Hellenic  ear  by  its  classic 
construction.  He  compares  it  with  the  prologues  of  Hero- 
dotus and  Thucydides  and  concludes  that  Luke's  prologue  is 
unsurpassed  for  brevity,  modesty,  and  dignity.^''  Of  no 
other  writer  in  the  New  Testament  could  such  statements 
be  made;  and  the  easy  conclusion  is  that  Luke  could  write 
so  much  better  Greek  because  he  himself  was  a  Greek. 

(3)  In  Col.  4.  10-14  Paul  sends  the  salutations  of  Aris- 
tarchus,  Mark,  and  Jesus  Justus  to  the  Colossians ;  and  he 
says  of  them,  "These  are  of  the  circumcision."  Then  he  goes 
on  to  send  the  salutations  of  Epaphras,  Luke,  and  Demas, 
as  if  these  were  not  included  among  those  of  the  circumci- 

"  Schaff.  op.  cit.,  pp.  656,  664. 


192     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

sion  whose  salutations  he  sent  first.  If  we  could  be  sure  that 
there  was  an  intentional  distinction  here,  as  there  certainly 
seems  to  be,  it  would  settle  the  matter  that  Luke  was  indeed 
a  Gentile  by  birth.  If  we  so  conclude,  we  have  in  Luke  the 
only  Gentile  among  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament 
books.  It  would  be  interesting  if  we  could  decide  not  only 
that  Luke  was  a  Gentile,  but  also  to  what  part  of  the  Gentile 
world  he  belonged. 

8.  Luke,  Citizen  of  Antioch 

All  indications  seem  to  point  to  Antioch  of  Syria  as  his 
home.  We  list  a  few  of  these:  (i)  Eusebius^^  says  that 
Luke  belonged  to  an  Antiochian  family. 

(2)  Jerome^^  tells  us  explicitly  that  Luke  was  a  physician 
of  Antioch,  and  a  preface  to  the  Gospel,  written,  as  Harnack 
thinks,  in  the  third  century,  says  that  Luke  was  by  nation 
a  Syrian  of  Antioch. 

(3)  In  the  book  of  Acts  Luke  names  the  seven  deacons 
appointed  over  the  church  of  Jerusalem  and  locates  only  one 
of  them,  and  he  is  "Nicolas  of  Antioch."  ^o  Why  was 
Nicolas  given  this  location?  Was  it  because  Luke  had 
known  him  at  Antioch  and  was  proud  of  the  fact  that  one 
of  his  fellow  citizens  had  been  appointed  to  such  an  office, 
and  therefore  considered  it  well  worth  his  recording?  James 
Smith  points  out  the  coincidence  that  of  eight  accounts  of 
the  Russian  campaign  of  181 2,  three  written  by  Frenchmen 
and  three  written  by  Englishmen  never  mention  the  fact  that 
the  Russian  General  Barclay  de  Tolly  was  of  Scotch  extrac- 
tion ;  but  the  two  accounts  of  that  campaign  written  by  the 
two  Scotchmen,  Scott  and  Alison,  both  mention  it.  It  was  of 
more  importance  to  them;  at  least  it  was  of  sufficient  im- 
portance to  seem  to  them  to  be  well  worth  chronicling. 

(4)  Luke  seems  to  be  well  acquainted  with  the  history 

^  Ecclesiastical  History,  iii,  4,  7. 
**De  Viris  lUustribus,  vii. 
*Acts6.  5. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  193 

of  the  church  at  Antioch  and  gives  us  an  unusually  full  ac- 
count of  its  pastors  and  teachers  and  their  enterprises  and 
their  trials.  He  makes  the  church  at  Antioch  the  mother  of 
all  the  Gentile  churches;  and  he  says  that  the  Christians 
were  first  called  by  that  name  in  Antioch.  Luke  seems  to  be 
well  acquainted  with  all  the  controversies  in  the  church  in 
this  city.  It  is  to  Antioch  that  Barnabas  summons  Saul, 
and  in  their  labors  together  in  the  synagogues  of  Antioch 
they  are  made  ready  for  their  advance  upon  the  Gentile 
world.  It  is  from  Antioch  that  Barnabas  and  Saul  are  sent 
forth  to  their  great  missionary  campaigns ;  and  it  is  to  An- 
tioch that  they  return  to  make  their  reports.  Such  records 
as  we  find  in  Acts  11.  19-30,  and  13.  1-3,  and  15.  1-3,  30-40 
lead  us  to  suppose  that  Luke  must  have  been  resident  in 
Antioch  and  that  he  was  personally  acquainted  with  the 
events  which  he  has  narrated  at  such  comparatively  unusual 
length. 

(5)  There  is  a  reading  peculiar  to  Codex  Bezae,  which 
was  known  to  Augustine,  and  which  was  accepted  by  him 
as  genuine  and  of  good  authority,  and  which  would  go  far 
to  settle  this  probability  of  Luke's  residence  in  Antioch  if 
we  adopted  it,  for  it  would  represent  the  first  occurrence  of 
the  pronoun  "we"  in  the  narrative  and  would  locate  the 
narrator  in  Antioch.  After  Acts  11.  27,  which  reads,  "Now 
in  these  days  there  came  down  prophets  from  Jerusalem 
unto  Antioch,"  Codex  Bezae  has  the  following  statement: 
"And  there  was  great  rejoicing;  and  when  we  were  gathered 
together  one  of  them  named  Agabus  stood  up,"  and  so  on. 
According  to  this  reading,  Luke  was  a  member  of  the  church 
at  Antioch  at  this  time.  If  so,  Luke  probably  was  among 
the  very  first  Gentile  converts  to  Christianity  in  Antioch. 
He  was  one  of  the  Hellenists  converted  before  Barnabas  or 
Paul  had  reached  Antioch,  and  we  can  imagine  how  heartily 
he  would  have  welcomed  his  old  school  friend  and  how 
cordially  their  association  in  Christian  work  would  have 
begun  at  this  time  and  place. 


194     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

(6)  There  is  still  another  indication  of  Luke's  connection 
with  Antioch.  He  dedicates  both  his  books  to  the  "most 
honorable  Theophilus."  Now,  the  Clementines  tell  us  that 
Theophilus  was  a  wealthy  citizen  of  Antioch.  He  probably 
held  some  official  position  there.  The  title  which  Luke  gives 
him  is  the  title  given  to  the  governors  Felix  and  Festus  in 
the  book  of  Acts,3i  and  it  may  be  reserved  for  those  who 
are  employed  in  the  government  service,  and  for  these  alone. 
Then  the  better  translation  of  the  title  would  be,  "most 
honorable"  or  "most  noble."  This  Theophilus  was  a  wealthy 
man  and  a  Christian  man,  and  it  may  be  that  he  was  Luke's 
literary  patron  and  furnished  him  the  leisure  and  the 
financial  backing  necessary  for  the  publication  of  his  two 
volumes  of  history. 

9.  Luke,  the  Freedman 

Some  have  thought  that  Luke  was  a  freedman.  The 
reasons  suggested  for  such  a  conclusion  are:  (i)  It  was  a 
custom  among  both  the  Greeks  and  the  Romans  to  educate 
some  one  of  their  domestic  slaves  in  the  medical  profession, 
and  if  he  proved  expert  in  it,  it  was  not  an  unusual  thing  for 
them  to  grant  him  his  freedom  in  return  for  his  services.  A 
large  number  of  the  physicians  of  that  day  are  said  to  have 
belonged  to  this  class. 

(2)  Such  names  as  Luke's,  contractions  in  as,  as  "Lucas" 
for  "Lucanus,"  we  are  told,  were  peculiarly  common  in  the 
names  of  slaves.  Luke  was  a  man  of  broad  sympathies  for 
all  the  down-trodden  and  the  poor,  as  his  writings  well  show. 
Did  he  learn  this  sympathy  for  all  the  wretched  ones  when 
he  was  a  slave,  and  in  all  his  after  life  of  freedom  did  he 
never  lose  his  memory  of  their  need?  And  was  it  therefore 
one  of  his  chief  delights  in  the  gospel  that  in  his  conception 
of  it  its  first  and  chief  mission  was  to  preach  good  tidings  to 


""Acts  23.  26;  24.  3;  26,  25. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  195 

the  poor,  to  proclaim  release  to  the  captives,  and  to  set  at 
liberty  them  that  are  bruised  ?  ^^ 

If  Luke  began  life  as  a  slave,  he  must  have  made  the  most 
of  all  the  opportunities  offered  him,  and  very  early  in  Hfe 
he  must  have  proved  himself  worthy  of  freedom;  and  in  his 
later  Ufe,  with  his  scientific  and  professional  training,  he 
was  a  worthy  and  beloved  associate  of  those  other  university 
graduates,  Paul  and  Apollos,  and  possibly  Barnabas.  Of 
all  the  first  preachers  of  the  gospel  these  alone  would  seem 
to  have  had  the  advantages  of  the  schools,  and  most 
naturally  they  drifted  together  and  found  the  greatest  pleas- 
ure in  each  other's  congenial  companionship.  College  men 
are  birds  of  a  feather,  and,  unless  there  be  some  personal 
reason  to  the  contrary,  they  are  sure  to  flock  together;  and 
if  they  do  so,  their  service  to  any  cause  they  may  espouse  is 
usually  found  to  be  the  most  efficient  service  it  can  muster. 

Barnabas  was  the  great  reconciler  in  the  infant  church. 
Apollos  was  the  great  orator;  and  if  he  wrote  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hiebrews,  he  added  the  finest  literary  composition  to  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament.  Paul  was  the  church  organ- 
izer and  pioneer  missionary  and  systematic  theologian  with- 
out a  peer.  Luke  was  the  author  of  the  most  beautiful 
book  ever  written  and  the  incomparable  historian  of  the 
early  church.  It  would  seem  that  Christianity  could  not 
have  gotten  along  very  well  in  the  beginning  without  these 
four  college  men,  as  it  has  not  been  able  to  get  along  very 
well  at  any  time  since  without  the  leadership  of  men  of  the 
highest  education.  Three  of  these  men,  Barnabas,  Paul,  and 
Luke,  possibly  met  each  other  for  the  first  time  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Tarsus;  and  their  friendship  formed  in  college 
may  have  had  much  to  do  with  the  shaping  of  their  future 
lives.  Apollos  came  from  the  rival  school  at  Alexandria; 
but  when  he  became  a  Christian  he  was  admitted  to  their 
circle  without  question  as  a  man  of  culture  and  refinement, 

"  Luke  4.  18. 


196     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

and  therefore  sure  to  furnish  serviceable  and  congenial  com- 
panionship. 

lo.  Luke  in  Later  Tradition 

The  later  church  traditions  concerning  Luke  do  not  date 
farther  back  than  the  fourth  century,  A.  D.  Epiphanius 
tells  us  that  after  Paul's  death  Luke  preached  in  Italy  and 
in  Gaul  and  in  Dalmatia  and  in  Macedonia.^^  We  are  told 
that  he  lived  to  the  age  of  seventy-four  or  eighty-four. 
One  account  says  that  he  was  finally  crucified  in  the  Pelo- 
ponnesus, at  Eleaea,  on  an  olive  tree.  Another  account  says 
that  he  died  a  natural  death  in  Bithynia.  Later  we  read 
that  his  bones  were  brought  from  Patras  in  Achaia  by  the 
order  of  the  emperor  Constantine  and  were  buried  in  the 
Church  of  the  Apostles  in  Constantinople,  in  357  A.  D. 

II.  An  Outline  Biography 

We  have  now  before  us  all  the  facts  and  all  the  inferences 
and  traditions  out  of  which  it  might  be  possible  to  con- 
struct an  ideal  biography  of  the  evangelist  Luke.  Shall 
we  make  the  attempt  to  outline  his  career  upon  the  basis  of 
these?  We  shall  remember  all  the  cautions  suggested  by 
Zahn  when  he  says :  "The  imagination  has  a  place  in  histor- 
ical science  only  in  so  far  as  it  serves  to  set  in  a  clear  light 
the  possibility  and  probability  of  the  presuppositions  which 
are  demanded  by  the  actual  facts.  Nor  has  the  imagination 
any  rights  over  against  a  tradition,  be  this  as  meager  as  it 
may,  until  it  is  shown  that  the  latter  is  without  basis  in  fact, 
and  therefore  false.  Finally,  the  imagination  must  guard 
itself  carefully  against  postulates  which  have  possible  sup- 
port only  in  the  narrow  experience  of  scholars  whose  vision 
is  bounded  by  the  four  walls  of  a  study."  ^*  Within  these 
legitimate  limits  and  availing  ourselves  of  the  material  in 
hand  we  suggest  the  following  particulars : 


"Haer.  51. 

**  Zahn,  op.  cit.,  ii,  p.  376. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  197 

1.  Luke  was  born  a  slave  boy  in  the  household  of  Theo- 
philus,  a  wealthy  government  official  in  Antioch.  He  grew 
up  into  most  engaging  appearance  and  most  attractive  per- 
sonality. He  was  of  a  peculiarly  acute  intellect  and  of  a 
most  obliging  disposition.  He  won  his  master's  confidence 
and  then  his  personal  hking.  Theophilus  decided  to  educate 
the  boy  at  his  own  expense  and  at  the  best  university  in  the 
land.  So  it  was  that  the  second  capital  event  in  the  life  of 
Luke  was  his  matriculation  at  Tarsus. 

2.  Here  he  studied  medicine,  where  the  great  masters  in 
that  profession,  Aretaeus,  Dioscorides,  and  Athenasus,  had 
been  educated.  Just  a  few  miles  away  at  .^gse  stood  the 
great  Temple  of  .^Esculapius,  which  furnished  the  nearest 
approach  to  the  modern  hospital  to  be  found  in  the  ancient 
world.  From  the  university  lectures  Luke  got  the  theory  of 
medicine;  in  the  Temple  of  .-^sculapius  he  got  the  practice 
and  experience  he  needed.  He  made  the  acquaintance  of 
Barnabas  and  Saul  here,  and  laid  the  foundations  for  a 
lifelong  friendship  with  these  men. 

3.  His  education  completed,  he  returned  to  Antioch  and 
rendered  faithful  and  most  successful  service  in  his  master's 
family.  Then  the  gospel  was  preached  at  Antioch  by  men 
of  Cyprus  and  Cyrene,  fleeing  from  the  persecution  in  Jeru- 
salem; and  Luke  was  among  the  first  to  hear  it  and  to  ac- 
cept it.  He  told  his  master,  Theophilus,  about  it,  and 
Theophilus  himself  became  interested  and  at  last  converted. 
Then  about  the  first  thing  Theophilus  did  as  a  Christian  was 
to  give  Luke  his  freedom. 

4.  The  first  impulse  of  the  freedman  Luke  was  to  get 
away  from  all  the  scenes  of  his  servitude  and  to  test  his 
new-found  liberty  by  wandering  far  and  wide  at  his  own 
sweet  will.  He  shipped  as  a  physician  upon  one  of  the 
vessels  plying  up  and  down  the  Mediterranean,  and  there 
he  had  manifold  experiences.  His  outlook  was  broad- 
ened as  he  saw  more  of  the  world.  He  was  of  service  to 
many  people  and  he  made  many  friends. 


198     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

5.  On  one  of  his  voyages  he  met  some  members  of  the 
family  of  Lucanus,  the  poet,  and  they  persuaded  him  to  ac- 
company them  to  their  home  in  Corduba  in  Spain.  Luke 
was  there  when  the  poet  was  born,  and  the  baby  boy  was 
named  after  him.  In  this  household  he  became  acquainted 
with  Gallio  and  Seneca  and  many  other  notable  men.  The 
slave  boy  had  risen  to  a  considerable  height,  for  his  natural 
ability  and  his  excellent  education  and  his  goodness  of  heart 
enabled  him  to  converse  with  the  best  of  men  as  their  equal, 
and  as  a  freedman  and  physician  he  was  admitted  to  terms 
of  intimacy  which  otherwise  would  have  been  impossible. 

6.  In  due  time  he  came  back  to  Antioch  and  was  resident 
there  when  many  of  the  stirring  events  which  he  narrates 
in  the  history  of  its  Christian  Church  took  place. 

7.  Later  he  removed  to  Troas  and  settled  there,  where 
Paul  found  him  on  his  second  missionary  journey.  He  went 
with  Paul  to  Philippi,  and  was  left  in  charge  of  the  church 
in  that  city  for  seven  years. 

8.  He  left  Philippi  with  Paul  in  A.  D.  58,  and  remained 
with  Paul  thereafter  until  the  apostle's  m^tyrdom. 

9.  Some  time  after  this  event  he  wrote  the  third  Gospel 
and  the  book  of  Acts  for  Theophilus,  and  he  fully  intended 
to  write  a  third  volume  continuing  the  history,  but  he  was 
swept  away  into  the  tide  of  Christian  evangelism  and  never 
found  the  leisure  to  do  it. 

10.  He  labored  as  an  evangelist  in  many  lands,  and  in  a 
ripe  old  age  he  fell  on  sleep  and  was  buried  somewhere  in 
Greece. 

11.  Luke  was  one  of  the  most  respected  and  best-beloved 
members  of  the  early  church.  His  praise  was  in  all  the 
churches.  All  women  liked  him  and  all  men  honored  him. 
Apollos  and  he  were  the  most  accompHshed  writers,  and 
Paul  and  he  were  the  most  prolific  writers  of  the  New 
Testament  times.  Take  the  writings  of  Luke  and  Paul 
out  of  the  New  Testament  and  it  would  be  less  than  half  its 
present  size;  and  of  the  larger  half  of  the  present  con- 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  199 

tents  of  the  New  Testament  Luke  wrote  more  than  Paul. 
He  was  a  most  versatile  man — a  physician,  a  musician,  a 
painter,  a  poet,  a  preacher,  a  prolific  author,  an  intrepid  mis- 
sionary— a  man  with  many  gifts  and  many  friends  and  mani- 
fold accomplishment.  His  biography  was  a  romance.  His 
books  are  invaluable.  Both  he  and  they  are  worth  our 
knowing  and  knowing  well. 

n.  Sources  of  the  Gospel 

Luke  was  not  an  eyewitness  of  the  events  in  the  gospel 
history.  Where  did  he  get  his  information  concerning  these 
things  he  has  recorded?  We  turn  to  the  beginning  words  of 
the  Gospel  to  find  what  he  himself  has  to  say  about  it.  We 
find  that  Luke  appeals  both  to  documentary  authorities  and 
to  personal  witnesses,^^  and  we  ask,  i,  What  were  Luke's 
documents  ? 

We  think  we  can  distinguish  a  few  of  them,  (i)  After 
the  introduction  explaining  the  authority  and  the  aims  of 
the  book,  the  first  two  chapters  of  the  third  Gospel  are  full 
of  Hebraic  expressions  and  diflfer  so  widely  in  style  and 
general  character  from  the  remainder  of  the  Gospel  that 
almost  all  scholars  have  concluded  that  they  are  translations 
from  the  Aramaic,  and  probably  represent  two  or  three 
written  sources.  We  may  find  the  conclusions  of  these 
fragments  at  i.  80;  2.  40;  and  2.  52. 

(2)  The  genealogy  in  3.  23-38  must  have  been  taken,  of 
course,  from  some  legal  or  tribal  or  temple  document. 

(3)  It  does  not  seem  probable  that  Luke  was  acquainted 
with  our  Gospel  according  to  Matthew  either  in  the  Greek 
or  in  the  Hebrew.  It  is  possible  that  he  did  not  know  the 
Gospel  according  to  Mark  in  its  present  form.  We  know, 
however,  that  Mark  was  at  Rome  with  Paul  in  A.  D.  64, 
according  to  Col.  4.  10  and  Philem.  24.  We  know,  further, 
that  Luke  was  there  at  the  same  time.^®    When  we  notice, 

"  Luke  I.  1-4. 
"  Col.  4.  14. 


200     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

therefore,  that  there  are  certain  portions  of  Luke's  narrative 
which  are  paralleled  in  Mark's  account  and  which  are 
not  to  be  found  in  the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew, 
the  most  natural  and  adequate  explanation  of  these  par- 
allels between  Mark  and  Luke  would  be  found  in  the  per- 
sonal association  of  these  two  men  at  Rome,  where  they 
could  compare  notes  of  material  already  collected.  Of 
these  passages  in  Luke,  not  to  be  found  in  Matthew,  but 
paralleled  in  Mark  and  possibly  derived  from  manuscript 
notes  made  by  Mark  himself,  we  may  mention  the  story  of 
the  demoniac  healed  in  the  synagogue  on  the  Sabbath,^' 
the  journey  through  Galilee,^^  the  prayer  of  the  demo- 
niac,^^  the  complaint  of  John  against  the  man  who  would  not 
follow  them,  but  who  would  persist  in  casting  out  devils, 
nevertheless,^^  and  the  women  bringing  spices  to  the  sepul- 
cher.*^ 

2.  Among  the  eyewitnesses  and  ministers  of  the  Word 
from  whom  Luke  could  have  obtained  some  information  we 
may  be  sure  of  some,  at  least,  (i)  As  a  physician  Luke 
would  come  into  confidential  relations  with  many  women, 
and  as  the  women  who  ministered  to  Jesus  and  had  had 
personal  experiences  with  him  during  the  course  of  his  min- 
istry came  to  know  Luke  and  to  like  him  and  trust  him 
they  could  tell  him  some  of  those  things  concerning  women 
and  their  relation  to  Jesus  which  Luke  alone  has  pre- 
served for  us.  Such  facts  as  we  find  in  Luke  7.  36-50; 
8.  2,  3;  10.  38-42;  II.  27;  23.  27-29,  49,  56  must  have  come 
from  the  women  themselves. 

(2)  Luke  seems  to  have  had  some  special  source  of  in- 
formation concerning  matters  pertaining  to  the  court  of 
Herod.     The   information  given   us  in   such  passages  as 


*'  Luke 

4- 

33-37- 

"4.  43, 

44 

"8.38. 

"9.  49. 

"24.1. 

THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  201 

8-  3;  13-  32;  23.  5-12  is  to  be  found  in  Luke's  narrative 
alone.  We  read  in  Acts  13.  i  that  Paul  and  his  companions, 
among  whorh  Luke  may  have  been  one,  were  associated  with 
Manaen,  the  foster  brother  of  Herod.  It  is  easy  to  conclude 
that  all  inside  information  concerning  Herod  and  his  court 
came  to  Paul  or  to  Luke  through  him.  Sanday,  however,  is 
inclined  to  think  that  Luke's  informant  in  these  things  was 
a  woman,  and  he  identifies  her  with  Joanna,  the  wife 
of  Chuza,  Herod's  steward,  who  was  one  of  the  women 
ministering  of  her  substance  to  Jesus  and  his  company,'*^ 
,and  one  of  the  group  at  the  tomb  on  the  resurrection  morn- 
ing.^3  Sanday  thinks  that  she  may  have  been  Mary's  con- 
fidante and  the  one  who  wrote  down  Mary's  account  of  the 
Annunciation  which  Luke  afterward  used  in  his  Gospel.'** 

(3)  In  Acts  21.  16  we  are  told  that  Luke  lodged  while 
at  Jerusalem  with  Mnason  of  Cyprus,  who  had  been  a  dis- 
ciple from  the  beginning.  Here,  then,  was  another  who 
could  give  him  original  information  concerning  many  things. 

(4)  There  must  have  been  many  other  early  disciples 
whom  Luke  met  at  various  times.  He  may  have  met  Peter 
and  Barnabas  at  Antioch.  He  surely  would  meet  James  and 
the  elders  of  the  church  when  he  came  with  Paul  to  Jeru- 
salem. 

(5)  During  the  two  years  of  Paul's  imprisonment  in 
Caesarea  Luke  became  acquainted  with  Philip  the  evangelist 
and  his  daughters.  All  they  knew  as  to  the  facts  of  Christ's 
life  they  would  gladly  share  with  Luke. 

(6)  At  Caesarea  Luke  was  only  fifty  miles  from  Jeru- 
salem, and  there  was  a  good  road  between  the  two  cities; 
and  he  was  only  two  days'  journey  from  the  shores  of  Lake 
Gennesaret.  A  man  bent  upon  tracing  accurately  from  the 
first  the  course  of  events  in  the  life  of  the  Lord  hardly 
could  have  failed  to  visit  these  places,  and,  exploring  among 

«  Luke  8.  3. 

**Luke  24.  10. 

"  Expository  Times,  xiv,  p.  299. 


202     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

them  and  on  into  Peraea,  Luke  could  have  picked  up  such 
items  of  information  as  we  find  in  7.  11-17;  24.  13-35  ^^^^ 
many  things  in  the  Peraean  ministry  which  we  find  recorded 
nowhere  else. 

We  do  not  know  what  Luke  was  doing  during  the  two 
years  of  Paul's  imprisonment  at  Csesarea,  but  we  may  be 
sure  that  he  was  employing  his  time  well;  and  what  more 
congenial  employment  could  he  have  found  than  the  gather- 
ing of  materials  for  a  narrative  of  the  things  which  had  been 
fulfilled  in  that  vicinity  in  the  founding  of  the  Christian 
Church?  He  could  interview  any  number  of  eyewitnesses 
and  he  could  trace  the  course  of  all  things  accurately  from 
the  first  in  personal  investigation.  Did  he  write  the  Gospel 
at  this  time? 

in.  Date  of  the  Gospel 

There  are  those  who  think  that  Luke  must  have  written 
the  third  Gospel  either  during  Paul's  imprisonment  at 
Caesarea  or  the  immediately  succeeding  imprisonment  at 
Rome.  The  following  authorities  agree  that  the  narrative 
as  we  have  it  was  written  before  or  about  A.  D.  63 :  Alford, 
Ebrard,  Farrar,  Gloag,  Godet,  Guericke,  Hofmann,  Home, 
Hug,  Keil,  Lange,  Lardner,  Lumby,  Michaelis,  Schaff,  Tho- 
luck,  Thomson,  Wieseler,  and  others.  They  say:  i.  The 
Gospel  according  to  Luke  must  have  been  written  before 
the  book  of  Acts,  and  the  book  of  Acts  does  not  say  any- 
thing about  the  death  of  Paul,  and  the  close  of  its  narrative 
seems  to  coincide  with  the  date  of  Luke's  writing.  There- 
fore both  the  Gospel  and  the  book  of  Acts  were  written  be- 
fore the  date  of  Paul's  martyrdom.  2.  When  Luke  tells  us 
about  the  prophecy  of  the  famine  made  by  Agabus  in  Acts 
II.  28  he  is  careful  to  add  that  the  prophecy  was  fulfilled 
in  the  days  of  Claudius,  44-48  A.  D. ;  but  when  he  tells  us 
about  the  prophecy  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  made  by 
Jesus,  in  Luke  21.  5-36,  he  does  not  say  that  that  prophecy 
was  fulfilled.    He  surely  would  have  done  so  if  he  had  been 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  203 

writing  later  than  A.  D,  70.    He  does  not  do  so  because  the 
destruction  of  the  capital  city  had  not  yet  taken  place. 

However,  many  other  authorities  think  that  we  must 
decide  upon  a  later  date  for  the  composition  of  the  third 
Gospel.  They  point  out  the  following  facts:  i.  We  must 
allow  time  for  a  large  number  of  people  to  draw  up  narra- 
tives concerning  the  sayings  and  doings  of  Jesus. 

2.  Twice  in  the  Gospel^^  Luke  puts  the  name  of  John 
before  that  of  his  brother  James  in  naming  the  two  together. 
Matthew  and  Mark  never  do  that.  They  always  put  James 
first.  This  seems  to  be  an  indication  that  Luke  wrote  at 
a  later  period  than  the  other  two  synoptists,  and  at  a  time 
when  James  had  died  or  when  for  some  other  reason  John 
was  being  recognized  as  the  more  prominent  or  influential 
of  the  two. 

3.  The  prophecies  concerning  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem as  recorded  in  Luke  are  much  more  definite  than  the 
parallel  prophecies  in  Matthew  and  Mark.  Even  though 
Luke  does  not  say  that  these  prophecies  had  been  fulfilled, 
their  greater  definiteness  bears  witness  to  that  fact.  After 
the  event  the  details  of  the  sayings  of  Jesus  concerning  it 
were  remembered  more  vividly  and  recorded  more  accu- 
rately. 

4.  In  the  midst  of  these  prophecies  in  Matthew  and  Mark 
the  evangelists  have  inserted  a  note  of  warning  to  their 
readers — "Let  him  that  readeth  understand."  ^^  Luke 
omits  this  clause,  the  time  for  such  warning  having  gone  by. 

5.  The  designation  of  Jesus  as  "Lord,"  not  found  at  all  in 
Mark  and  only  occasionally  in  Matthew,  is  more  frequent 
in  Luke.  This  seems  to  be  a  mark  of  later  date,  when  this 
title  was  becoming  more  common  among  the  disciples. 
Among  those  who  believe  that  the  Gospel  was  written  after 
the  death  of  Paul  and  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem 


'8.  51  and  9.  28. 

'Matt.  24.  15;  Mark  13.  14. 


204     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

and  in  the  later  old  age  of  Luke,  we  may  mention  Beyschlag, 
Bleek,  Cook,  Credner,  De  Wette,  Holtzmann,  Ewald, 
Julicher,  Meyer,  Plummer,  Ramsay,  Renan,  Reuss,  Sanday, 
Schenkel,  and  Weiss. 

IV.  Place  of  Writing 

Jerome  says  that  Luke  wrote  the  Gospel  in  Achaia  and 
Boeotia.  Godet  selects  the  city  of  Corinth  as  the  most  likely 
place.  Ewald,  Holtzmann,  Hug,  Keim,  and  Zeller  guess 
that  the  Gospel  was  written  at  Rome;  Michaelis,  Kuinoel, 
Schott,  Thiersch,  and  Tholuck  at  Csesarea;  Hilgenfeld  in 
Asia  Minor ;  and  Kostlin  at  Ephesus.  In  the  Peshito  version 
the  title  reads,  "The  Gospel  of  Luke  the  evangelist,  which 
he  published  and  preached  in  Greek  in  Alexandria  the 
Great."  Plummer  says  there  is  no  evidence  for  or  against 
any  of  these  places.  Weiss  adds  that  "all  conjectures  as  to 
the  place  of  composition  are  quite  visionary  and  have  no 
value  whatever."  Under  these  circumstances  may  we  not 
conjecture  that  it  was  at  Caesarea  in  the  days  of  Paul's  im- 
prisonment that  the  first  considerable  gathering  of  material 
for  this  Gospel  narrative  was  made,  and  that  Luke  contin- 
ued his  work  as  opportunity  ofifered  during  the  later  im- 
prisonment at  Rome,  and  that  in  the  after  days  in  the  mo- 
ments of  leisure  he  may  have  snatched  from  his  missionary 
labors  he  completed  the  book,  giving  it  its  final  touches  in 
some  village  retreat  in  Greece,  and  writing  last  of  all  the 
preface  dedicating  it  to  Theophilus  some  time  between 
A.  D.  70  and  80?  This  gradual  gathering  and  shaping  of 
the  material  in  hand  would  leave  room  to  account  for  all  the 
phenomena  involved  in  the  text,  and  the  final  finishing  in 
the  intervals  of  an  itinerant  missionary  village  visitation  in 
Greece  would  meet  the  requirements  of  Jerome's  sugges- 
tion that  it  was  composed  in  places  in  both  Achaia  and 
Boeotia.  In  various  humble  village  homes  by  the  light  of  a 
dim-burning  olive-oil  wick  we  see  the  beloved  evangelist 
completing  the  most  beautiful  book  ever  written. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  205 

V.  Characterizations  of  the  Gospel 

I.  This  is  The  Gospel  for  the  Gentiles. 

When  we  turn  to  the  study  of  the  book,  the  first  thing  we 
notice  is  that  it  is  written  from  a  Gentile  point  of  view,  and 
that  makes  it  noteworthy  at  once.  It  is  the  only  book  in 
the  New  Testament  of  which  that  can  be  said,  except  the 
book  of  Acts,  also  written  by  Luke. 

All  the  other  books  in  our  Bible,  both  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  in  the  New  Testament,  were  written  by  Jews. 
Our  Bible  is  a  Jewish  book  from  beginning  to  end,  as  far 
as  authorship  is  concerned.  Its  writers  were  all  of  the 
Hebrew  race,  and  they  all  had  more  or  less  of  the  Hebrew 
prejudice  and  point  of  view.  Jesus  was  a  Jew.  All  of  the 
twelve  apostles  were  Jews.  All  of  the  first  churches  were 
composed  wholly  of  Jews.  Even  Paul,  the  champion  of  the 
Gentiles,  was  himself  a  Jew,  and  he  never  wholly  freed 
himself  from  the  results  of  his  rabbinical  training  and 
thought.  If  Luke  had  not  written  these  books,  all  of 
Gentile  Christendom  would  have  been  dependent  forever 
upon  Jewish  sources  for  the  whole  of  its  record  of  the 
revelation  of  God  unto  men.  But  in  these  two  books  we  see 
how  the  life  of  Jesus  and  the  fortunes  of  the  early  Chris- 
tian Church  appear  from  a  Gentile  point  of  view.  The 
Gospel  according  to  Matthew  gives  us  a  Jewish  point  of 
view.  The  Gospel  according  to  Mark  gives  us  a  Jew's 
account,  adapted  to  the  use  of  Gentiles.  Now  Luke,  a 
Gentile,  will  write  for  Gentiles,  and  our  New  Testament  will 
have  a  Gentile  Gospel,  a  Gospel  written  for  us  and  by  one 
of  ourselves. 

How  do  we  know  that  Luke  is  writing  for  us  rather  than 
for  the  Jews?  (i)  Because  of  his  explanations  of  things 
with  which  the  Jews  were  perfectly  familiar,  but  of  which 
Gentiles  might  be  supposed  to  be  ignorant.  He  tells  us  that 
Nazareth  was  a  city  of  Galilee.*'^     He  gives  us  the  same 

"  I.  26. 


2o6     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

information  concerning  Capernaum.^^  He  says  that  the 
feast  of  unleavened  bread  was  called  the  passover.^^  All 
Jews  knew  these  things  without  being  told.  Luke  wrote 
them  down  for  the  benefit  of  those  who  were  not  acquainted 
with  the  geography  of  Palestine  or  with  the  feasts  of  the 
Jewish  ritual.  However,  it  is  when  we  turn  from  such 
small  details  to  consider  the  general  spirit  of  the  book  that 
its  Gentile  point  of  view  becomes  most  apparent. 

(2)  Of  the  three  synoptic  Gospels  this  is  by  far  the 
most  cathoHc  in  its  sympathies  and  universalistic  in  its  out- 
look, a.  It  has  a  genealogy  of  Jesus,  even  as  Matthew  had, 
but  the  genealogy  of  Matthew  was  a  Jewish  genealogy.  It 
gave  the  generation  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  son  of  David,  the 
son  of  Abraham.^*^  Abraham  was  the  father  of  the  Jews, 
and  Matthew  was  content  to  show  that  Jesus  was  a  descend- 
ant of  Abraham,  a  genuine  Jew  by  race.  Luke  is  not  con- 
tent with  that  genealogy,  and  therefore  he  writes  another 
one,  and  he  carries  the  line  of  ancestors  back  of  David  and 
back  of  Abraham  and  up  to  Adam,  the  father  of  the  human 
race.  Then  he  says  of  Adam  that  he  was  the  son  of  God.^^ 
Was  Jesus  a  Jew  and  a  son  of  Abraham,  and  did  he  there- 
fore belong  to  the  Jewish  race?  Yes,  that  was  all  true, 
but  it  was  not  the  whole  of  the  truth.  Jesus  was  a  Jew, 
but  he  was  more  than  that :  he  was  a  man,  and  he  belonged 
to  all  mankind. 

That  was  the  first  thing  which  this  Gentile  Gospel  would 
make  perfectly  clear  to  the  world.  Our  Lord  is  a  son  of 
Adam,  as  we  are  sons  of  Adam.  He  is  flesh  of  our  flesh 
and  bone  of  our  bone.  He  is  our  brother-man.  He  is  not 
far  from  every  one  of  us.  Our  God  hath  made  of  one  blood 
all  nations  of  men;  and  if  any  man  will  seek  for  our  Lord, 
he  will  find  that  he  is  of  one  blood  with  himself,  a  son  of 
Adam,  a  son  of  God.  Jesus  is  the  last  Adam.  He  belongs 
to  humanity.     He  is  the  Kinsman-Redeemer  of  the  race. 

*'4-  31.  ="Matt.  I.  I. 

*'22.  1.  "3.  38. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  207 

Matthew  gave  us  the  Jewish  genealogy.  Luke  makes  it  a 
Gentile  genealogy  by  carrying  it  beyond  Abraham  the  father 
of  the  Jews  to  Adam  the  father  of  the  race.  Jesus  belongs 
to  the  Jews,  but  he  belongs  to  us  as  well  as  to  them.  He  is 
the  Saviour  of  all  men.    He  is  the  Head  of  all  humanity. 

b.  We  look  into  Matthew's  narrative,  and  we  find  the 
story  of  the  wise  men  coming  from  the  East  with  their 
question,  "Where  is  he  who  is  born  King  of  the  Jews?"  ^^ 
We  turn  to  Luke's  account  of  the  birth  of  Jesus  and  we  find 
no  such  question,  but  an  angel  makes  announcement  from 
the  open  sky,  "I  bring  you  good  tidings  of  great  joy  which 
shall  be  to  all  the  people."  ^^  The  Jesus  of  whom  Luke 
writes  is  to  be,  not  only  the  King  of  the  Jews,  but  also  the 
Saviour  of  all  men. 

c.  Matthew  tells  us  that  Isaiah  spoke  of  John  the  Baptist 
and  called  him 

"The  voice  of  one  crying  in  the  wilderness, 
Make  ye  ready  the  way  of  the  Lord, 
Make  his  paths  straight."  ^^ 

Luke  tells  us  about  the  ministry  of  John  the  Baptist,  and 
he  quotes  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah  as  fulfilled  in  him ;  but  he 
is  not  willing  to  stop  where  Matthew  did  in  that  quotation. 
He  carries  it  on  until  he  makes  of  it  a  prophecy  of  comfort 
to  the  Gentiles.  He  says:  "Listen!  These  are  the  words 
with  which  Isaiah  continues  his  prophecy, 

"Every  valley  shall  be  filled, 
And  every  mountain  and  hill  shall  be  brought  low; 
And  the  crooked  shall  become  straight. 
And  the  rough  ways  smooth ; 
And  all  flesh  shall  sec  the  salvation  of  God."  ^^ 


'Matt.  2.  2. 
'2.  10. 
'Matt.  3-  3- 
'Luke  3.  5,  6. 


2o8     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

It  surely  was  worth  while  to  add  that  sentence,  for  it  shows 
that  this  Jewish  prophecy  is  of  interest  to  all  mankind. 
Gentiles  as  well  as  Jews  are  to  see  the  salvation  of  God. 

d.  Did  Jesus  confine  practically  the  whole  of  his  own  min- 
istry to  the  Jews  ?  Yes,  but  Luke  is  careful  to  tell  us  what 
no  one  of  the  other  evangelists  had  recorded  for  us,  that  in 
his  ministry  to  the  Jews  Jesus  reminded  them  again  and 
again  that  the  providence  of  God  had  been  displayed  in 
behalf  of  the  Gentiles  as  well  as  in  behalf  of  themselves. 
In  the  beginning  of  his  ministry,  in  the  synagogue  at  Naza- 
reth, Jesus  said:  "There  were  many  Jewish  widows  in  the 
time  of  Elijah,  but  Elijah  passed  them  all  by  and  his  mi- 
raculous help  was  given  to  a  heathen  widow  in  Sidon.  And 
there  were  many  Jewish  lepers  in  the  time  of  Elisha,  but  the 
prophet  did  not  heal  any  of  them.  He  healed  the  Syrian 
heathen  Naaman  instead."  ^^  The  Jews  were  filled  with 
wrath  at  these  sayings  and  cast  Jesus  out  of  their  city. 
That  was  just  the  difference  between  Jesus  and  his  fellow 
countrymen,  Luke  seems  to  say.  They  were  exclusive  and 
intolerant;  he  was  sympathetic  with  all.  They  wanted  all 
good  things  for  themselves;  he  shared  all  his  good  things 
with  all  who  asked  for  them  and  all  who  needed  them, 
Samaritans  or  Galileans,  Gentiles  or  Jews. 

e.  Possibly  the  most  characteristic  parables  of  the  gospel 
which  Jesus  preached  are  to  be  found  in  the  fifteenth  chapter 
of  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke.  Those  three  parables,  the 
lost  sheep,  the  lost  coin,  and  the  lost  son,  sum  up  all  the  good 
news  of  certain  salvation  to  sinful  men,  and  two  of  them, 
the  lost  coin  and  the  lost  son,  are  recorded  only  by  Luke. 
The  three  parables  surely  would  rank  among  the  most  pre- 
cious of  all  the  sayings  of  Jesus.  They  teach  the  Father's 
uncalculating  and  unceasing  sacrifice  and  search  until  the 
last  lost  sheep  is  found.  They  teach  the  Father's  loving 
illumination  and  diligent  labor  until  the  last  coin  with  his 
image  and  superscription  upon  it  has  been  restored.     They 

"  Luke  4.  25-30. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  209 

teach  the  Father's  warm  welcome  for  every  prodigal  who 
turns  his  face  toward  home.  His  grace  is  free  to  all,  and  it 
never  fails.  We  could  spare  any  other  parable  better  than 
the  parable  of  the  prodigal  son.  We  owe  its  preservation 
to  the  Gentile  Luke. 

f.  We  are  not  surprised  to  find  that  the  words,  "grace," 
"Saviour,"  "salvation,"  and  "evangelize"  are  found  in  this 
Gospel  more  often  than  in  any  other.  Luke  himself  was 
an  evangelist.  He  tells  us  that  the  angels  are  evangelists,'^'^ 
and  John  the  Baptist  was  an  evangelist,^*  and  Jesus  was  an 
evangelist,^'*  and  the  twelve  apostles  were  evangelists.®** 
Ten  times  in  this  book  that  verb,  "to  evangelize,"  occurs. 
The  whole  of  the  Gospel  has  to  do  with  good  news  for  all. 

In  that  first  sermon  in  the  synagogue  at  Nazareth  Jesus 
read  for  his  text  from  the  prophet  Isaiah : 

"The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me. 

Because  he  anointed  me  to  preach  good  tidings  to  the  poor : 

He  hath  sent  me  to  proclaim  release  to  the  captives, 

And  recovering  of  sight  to  the  blind. 

To  set  at  liberty  them  that  are  bruised, 

To  proclaim  the  acceptable  year  of  the  Lord." 

There  Jesus  closed  the  book  and  gave  it  back  to  the  attend- 
ant. It  was  a  strange  place  to  quit  in  his  reading.  It  was 
in  the  middle  of  a  sentence.  Jesus  did  not  read  the 
whole  of  the  prophecy.  He  did  not  even  finish  the  para- 
graph. He  did  not  even  read  to  a  period.  There  was  much 
of  comfort  and  of  good  news  in  the  remainder  of  the  sen- 
tence and  of  the  paragraph  and  of  the  prophecy.  Jesus  stops 
short  at  this  point.  Surely,  it  must  have  been  with  con- 
scious intention.  Surely,  it  must  have  been  with  some  good 
reason.    We  look  for  that  reason  and  we  find  that  the  next 

"  I.  19  and  2.  10. 

"3.  18. 

**4.  18,  43;  7.  22;  8.  I ;  16.  16;  20.  I. 


210     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

following  words  were,  'And  to  proclaim  the  day  of  ven- 
geance of  our  God.'  When  the  eyes  of  Jesus  fell  upon 
those  words  he  closed  the  book.  He  would  not  read  them. 
His  message  was  a  message  of  grace  and  not  a  proclamation 
of  vengeance.  He  would  rather  leave  the  sentence  unfin- 
ished than  to  leave  any  doubt  in  any  mind  as  to  that  fact.  He 
went  on  to  preach  his  good  tidings,  and  we  read  that  all  bare 
him  witness,  and  wondered  at  the  words  of  grace  which 
proceeded  out  of  his  mouth.^^ 

Luke  does  not  wonder.  He  seems  to  think  that  only 
words  of  grace  would  be  natural  to  Jesus.  He  pictures  the 
Master  as  the  gracious  Redeemer,  gracious  both  in  matter 
of  speech  and  in  manner  of  life.  Over  against  the  ungra- 
ciousness of  Simon  the  Pharisee  Luke  sets  in  contrast  the 
graciousness  of  Jesus  to  the  woman  who  was  a  sinner.  He 
was  a  perfect  gentleman  even  to  her.  She  had  heard  him  talk 
of  the  grace  of  God.  She  was  willing  to  put  it  to  the  test 
for  herself.  Jesus  did  not  fail  her  in  the  moment  of  trial. 
His  graciousness  included  all.  It  recognized  no  barrier  of 
social  distinctions.  The  courtesy  which  Simon  had  failed 
to  show  to  his  guest  she  more  than  made  up  with  her  love. 
Jesus  could  not  be  outdone  in  courtesy  by  anyone.  He  was 
even  more  gracious  to  her  than  she  was  grateful  to  him.^^ 

Was  the  grace  of  God  ever  set  forth  with  such  pathetic 
impressiveness  as  in  that  pearl  of  all  the  parables,  where  we 
read  that  while  the  returning  prodigal  was  yet  a  long  way 
off  his  father  saw  him  and  ran  to  meet  him,  and  then  cele- 
brated his  return  with  the  best  robe  and  a  fitting  feast  and 
music  and  dancing?  The  grace  of  the  dancers  was  only  the 
faintest  symbol  of  the  grace  in  that  father's  heart.  No 
gracious  act  of  earth  can  do  more  than  typify  the  heavenly 
Father's  exhaustless  grace.  Can  we  imagine  the  grace  in 
the  manner  of  Jesus  and  in  his  tone  as  he  spoke  that  parable? 
How  gracious  he  was  to  the  ten  lepers,  although  one  of 

"4.  22. 
"7.48. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  211 

them  was  an  alien  Samaritan !  Hkiw  gracious  he  was  to 
Zacchaeus,  promising  salvation  to  his  house,  although  he  had 
been  a  defrauding  and  despicable  publican,  as  little  and  mean 
in  his  spirit  as  he  was  little  and  mean  in  his  stature.  How 
gracious  he  was  to  Mary  when  Martha's  short  temper  had 
snapped  and  she  was  ready  to  ask  the  Master  to  join  her  in 
scolding  the  remissness  of  the  younger  girl!  Jesus  was  as 
gracious  to  her  as  her  sister  was  indignant  with  her. 

How  gracious  he  was  to  that  dying  thief !  The  male- 
factor was  suffering  his  just  deserts.  He  had  been  a  robber, 
and  in  all  probability  a  murderer,  and  he  was  receiving  the 
penalty  due  for  his  crimes.  His  fellow  malefactor  prayed 
to  Jesus  for  salvation,  "Save  thyself  and  us,"  but  it  was  in 
words  of  mockery  and  not  of  devotion;  and  Jesus  paid  no 
heed  to  him.  Possibly  he  was  the  only  one  who  ever  asked 
Jesus  for  salvation  and  found  his  cry  for  help  unheeded. 
The  other  dying  thief  recognized  the  innocence  of  Jesus  and 
rebuked  his  fellow  suft"erer  for  his  failure  in  courtesy  to 
such  a  character.  He  did  not  ask  for  salvation  from  the 
cross  or  from  death.  He  asked  Jesus  only  to  remember  him 
when  the  kingdom  preached  had  come.  It  was  the  most 
sublime  faith  chronicled  in  our  New  Testament.  He  be- 
lieved in  the  character  of  Jesus  and  in  the  coming  of  his 
kingdom,  despite  all  contrary  evidence.  All  of  the  disciples 
of  Jesus  had  forsaken  him  and  fled  away.  They  had  seen 
Jesus  raise  the  dead  and  yet  their  faith  had  failed  them  in 
that  hour.  The  thief  upon  the  cross  sees  Jesus  dying  upon 
the  cross  at  his  side,  and  yet  has  faith  in  him ! 

Now  see  with  what  graciousness  Jesus  makes  response  to 
such  faith.  "Verily — there  is  no  doubt  about  it.  I  am  not 
stating  to  you  a  mere  possibility,  but  a  most  certain  truth; 
for  where  I  am  there  shall  also  my  servants  be  with  me; 
therefore, — I  say  unto  thee.  To-day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in 
Paradise."  ^^  Bossuet  comments  upon  this  promise  as  fol- 

"^3.  43. 


212     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

lows :  "To-day — what  speed ! — with  me — what  companion- 
ship!— in  Paradise — what  rest!"  Jesus  had  consorted  with 
all  classes  of  people  here  upon  the  earth.  He  had  been  no 
respecter  of  persons  during  his  ministry.  He  went  into 
paradise  hand  in  hand  with  a  crucified  thief.  His  gracious- 
ness  will  be  his  characteristic  through  all  eternity  to  come. 
As  it  was  manifest  to  all  alike  in  the  days  of  his  ministry  it 
will  be  manifest  to  all  alike  for  evermore. 

The  Gospel  according  to  Luke  is  preeminently  the  Gospel 
of  God's  Grace.  It  has  surpassing  graciousness  of  content 
and  style.  It  sets  forth  the  life  of  the  gracious  Master  and 
Redeemer  of  men.  It  records  his  gracious  words  and  deeds, 
and  it  is  filled  with  his  spirit  of  grace  throughout.  The 
pearl  of  all  the  parables  is  found  in  this  Gospel,  and  it  pic- 
tures the  exhaustless  grace  of  the  Father's  love.  The 
heavenly  Fatherhood  was  to  Jesus  the  guarantee  of  bound- 
less, exhaustless,  infinite  grace.  It  was  in  the  faith  of  that 
gracious  Fatherhood  that  Jesus  lived  and  died.  It  was 
largely  the  manifestation  of  that  grace  in  his  life  which  made 
him  the  revealer  of  God  unto  men. 

It  is  a  noteworthy  fact  that  Luke  alone  has  the  record 
of  the  earliest  saying  of  Jesus  when  a  boy  of  only  twelve 
years,  and  also  the  only  record  of  what  probably  was  the 
last  word  spoken  on  the  cross,  and  that  these  earliest  and 
latest  recorded  sayings  of  the  Redeemer  are  near  allied. 
They  both  declare  the  faith  of  Jesus  in  the  divine  Father- 
hood and  his  implicit  confidence  in  the  Father's  providence 
and  gracious  care.  The  boy  said,  "I  must  be  in  my  Father's 
house."  The  dying  Saviour  said,  "Father,  into  thy  hands  I 
commend  my  spirit."  Here  is  the  source  of  the  gracious- 
ness of  Jesus,  in  the  grace  of  God  the  Father.  We  read  in 
the  Old  Testament. 

"Jehovah  is  merciful  and  gracious, 
Slow  to  anger,  and  abundant  in  loving-kindness." 

In  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  recorded  by  Matthew,  Jesus 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  213 

says,  "Ye  therefore  shall  be  perfect,  as  your  heavenly  Father 
is  perfect."  In  the  Sermon  on  the  Plain,  recorded  by  Luke, 
in  the  corresponding  command  we  find  Jesus  saying,  "Be  ye 
merciful  and  gracious  and  full  of  loving-kindness,  even  as 
your  Father  is  characterized  by  these  things."  We  see  the 
exemplification  of  the  exhortation  in  his  own  life.  The  gra- 
ciousness  of  Jesus  is  characteristic  of  both  his  manner  and 
speech  in  the  third  Gospel,  and  the  same  graciousness  be- 
comes characteristic  of  the  Gospel  as  well. 

There  is  severity  in  this  Gospel  when  severity  is  needed, 
but  characteristically  it  is  a  Gospel  of  Grace.  Paul  says 
much  about  the  grace  of  God,  but  what  he  says  in  the  way 
of  abstract  doctrinal  presentation  Luke  gives  us  in  the  way 
of  concrete  example.  That  makes  it  all  so  much  more  life- 
like and  interesting,  and  thousands  appreciate  and  love  the 
Gospel  according  to  Luke,  who  find  the  Pauline  Epistles 
more  or  less  of  a  closed  revelation.  The  Jesus  of  Luke 
seems  so  much  nearer  to  them  than  the  Jesus  of  Paul.  The 
grace  of  God  seems  so  much  more  tangible  and  accessible 
as  illustrated  in  the  pages  of  the  Gospel.  Divine  Grace  is 
the  keynote  of  the  whole  narration. 

g.  At  three  crisis  points  in  his  narrative  Luke  shows  us 
how  Jesus  was  rejected  by  the  Galilaeans,^^  and  by  the 
Samaritans,®^  and  by  the  Judaeans  and  the  assembled  na- 
tion of  the  Jews  at  the  passover  feast.''®  The  significant 
inference  is  that  the  gospel  must  look  beyond  all  of  these  for 
its  greatest  future  growth,  and  in  the  book  of  Acts  Luke 
shows  how  that  actually  came  to  pass. 

h.  We  note  that  in  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel  Luke  is 
the  only  one  of  the  evangelists  who  tells  us  the  story  of 
Simeon,  and  the  only  one  to  record  the  song  of  that  aged 
saint : 


•*4. 

29. 

"9. 

53. 

"23 

.  23. 

214     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

"Now  lettest  thou  thy  servant  depart,  Lord, 
According  to  thy  word,  in  peace ; 
For  mine  eyes  have  seen  thy  salvation. 
Which  thou  hast  prepared  before  the  face  of  all  peoples; 
A  light  for  revelation  to  the  Gentiles, 
And  the  glory  of  thy  people  Israel."  ^'^ 

Luke  sets  that  phrase,  "a  revelation  to  the  Gentiles,"  in  the 
very  forefront  of  his  Gospel. 

Then  we  turn  to  the  middle  of  the  Gospel  and  in  the  tenth 
chapter  we  find  a  fuller  account  of  the  sending  out  of  the 
seventy  than  any  other  evangelist  has  given  us;  and  the 
commentators  tell  us  that  the  Jews  reckoned  the  Gentile 
nations  to  be  seventy  in  number,  and  as  the  twelve  apostles 
represented  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel  the  seventy  evangel- 
ists by  their  very  number  represented  the  world-wide  des- 
tination of  the  gospel.  In  the  tenth  chapter  of  the  book  of 
Genesis  there  is  an  enumeration  of  seventy  nations,  and  the 
Jews  believed  that  these  nations  represented  the  whole 
human  race.  Therefore,  in  the  Talmud  we  find  it  recorded 
that  at  the  feast  of  tabernacles  the  Jews  offered  seventy 
bullocks  for  the  seventy  nations,  that  the  rain  may  fall  on 
the  fields  of  all  the  world.^^ 

Then  we  turn  to  the  end  of  the  Gospel,  and  in  its  closing 
words  we  hear  the  resurrected  Lord  commissioning  his 
church  to  preach  repentance  and  remission  of  sins  unto  all 
the  nations,  beginning  from  Jerusalem.^^  In  the  beginning 
and  the  middle  and  the  end  of  his  Gospel  Luke  makes  it 
clear  that  this  revelation  of  good  news  is  for  all  the  nations 
of  men. 

i.  When  Matthew  records  the  choice  of  the  twelve  apos- 
tles, and  lists  their  names,  he  proceeds  at  once  to  give  the 
charge  which  Jesus  laid  upon  them  before  he  sent  them 


2.  29-32. 

'  Lightfoot's  Hor.  Talm.,  John  7.  2. 
'24.  47. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  215 

forth,  and  the  very  first  commandment  laid  upon  them  was 
this:  "Go  not  into  any  way  of  the  Gentiles,  and  enter  not 
into  any  city  of  the  Samaritans:  but  go  rather  to  the  lost 
sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel."  '^^  Luke  tells  us  of  the  send- 
ing out  of  the  twelve  and  of  the  charge  given  them  by  the 
Master,  but  he  omits  any  refusal  of  the  gospel  to  the  Gen- 
tiles or  any  limitation  of  their  ministry  to  the  Jews.'^^  In 
the  next  chapter  he  gives  a  much  longer  and  fuller  account 
of  the  sending  out  of  the  seventy,  and  no  limitations  are 
suggested  for  their  evangelism,  while  their  number  sug- 
gested that  they  might  go  into  all  the  world. 

j.  Luke  was  the  first  church  historian.  Mark  and  Mat- 
thew wrote  memoirs.  John  wrote  a  philosophy  of  religion. 
No  other  writers  in  the  New  Testament  devoted  themselves 
to  narration.  Luke  the  Gentile  set  himself  to  write  a  histor- 
ical gospel,  following  Gentile  models  at  certain  points  and 
connecting  his  account  with  Gentile  history  throughout. 
He  seems  to  have  seen  clearly  from  the  very  first  that  the 
interests  of  Christianity  were  bound  up  with  the  interests 
of  world  history  and  that  the  birth  of  Jesus  was  an  event  of 
importance  to  the  whole  Roman  empire. 

He  is  the  only  writer  in  the  New  Testament  who  men- 
tions a  Roman  emperor  by  name,  and  he  names  three  of 
them,  Augustus,  Tiberius  and  Claudius.'^^  fjg  joins  the 
name  of  Jesus  with  that  of  the  governor  Quirinius  and 
Caesar  Augustus.'''^  He  unites  the  baptism  of  John  and  the 
beginning  ministry  of  Jesus  with  the  reign  of  Caesar  Tibe- 
rius and  the  rule  of  Pilate  and  Herod  and  Philip  and  Lysan- 
ias,  as  well  as  the  high-priesthood  of  Annas  and  Caiaphas."^* 
In  general,  Luke  has  a  much  larger  number  of  proper  names 
than  are  to  be  found  in  the  other  Gospels,  and  many  of  these 

'"  Matt.  10.  5,  6. 

"9.  1-6. 

"2.  I ;  3.  i;  Acts  n.  28;  18.  2, 

"2.  I,  2. 

"3-  I,  2. 


2i6     THE  SYNOPTIC. GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

are  the  names  of  those  prominent  in  the  poHtical  life  of  that 
day,  and  it  follows,  therefore,  that  almost  all  the  connecting 
links  between  the  gospel  history  and  contemporary  Gentile 
history  are  furnished  us  by  Luke.  He  begins  at  Bethle- 
hem, but  he  ends  at  Rome.  He  opens  his  narrative  with 
the  vision  of  Zacharias  in  the  seclusion  of  the  temple  at 
Jerusalem,  but  he  closes  it  with  the  preaching  of  the  apostle 
Paul  in  the  world  capital.  From  beginning  to  end  he  is 
bent  on  showing  that  the  gospel  is  a  gospel  for  a  world  em- 
pire, for  all  nations  of  men,  and  for  all  the  future  ages  of 
time. 

Van  Oosterzee  was  right  when  he  said,  "As  Paul  led  the 
people  of  the  Lord  out  of  the  bondage  to  the  law  into  the 
enjoyment  of  gospel  liberty,  so  did  Luke  raise  sacred  history 
from  the  standpoint  of  the  Israelitish  nationality  to  the 
higher  and  holier  ground  of  universal  humanity."  ^^  We 
owe  that  to  this  Gentile  writer.  His  explanations  for  Gentile 
readers,  his  allusions  to  Gentile  rulers  and  contemporary 
Gentile  history,  his  characteristic  additions  of  Gentile  proph- 
ecies and  promises  and  parables  combine  to  make  this  the 
Gentile  Gospel ;  and,  surely,  we  Gentiles  never  can  be  grate- 
ful enough  that  so  much  of  our  New  Testament  was  written 
from  a  Gentile  point  of  view.  As  Paul  is  the  apostle  to  the 
Gentiles,  Luke  is  the  evangelist  for  the  Gentiles.  The  Gos- 
pel according  to  Luke  and  the  book  of  Acts  are  written  by 
a  Gentile  for  the  Gentile  world. 

2.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  an  Educated  Man. 

Luke  is  the  only  one  of  the  four  evangelists  who  had  a 
scientific  training.  We  would  expect  to  see  the  results  of 
that  training  in  his  writings.  We  think  that  it  is  apparent  in 
his  Gospel  in  at  least  four  particulars :  ( i )  In  his  accuracy. 
He  tells  Theophilus  that  he  has  traced  the  course  of  events 
accurately  from  the  first,  and  that  therefore  Theophilus  may 
rest  assured  of  the  certainty  of  these  things  which  he  finds 


Quoted  by  Schaflf,  op.  cit.,  p.  659, 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  217 

here  recorded."^  Something  of  the  scholar's  exactness  is 
included  in  the  ideal  of  Luke,  and  he  seems  to  have  attained 
his  ideal  in  a  rather  remarkable  degree. 

Modern  criticism  again  and  again  has  attacked  the  cor- 
rectness of  his  statements,  but  it  never  has  been  successful 
in  proving  any  serious  mistake.  It  has  become  increasingly 
evident  that  it  is  dangerous  to  accuse  Luke  of  inaccuracy  in 
anything.  Time  and  new  discoveries  have  proven  him  right 
and  his  critics  wrong  again  and  again.  Such  eminent  modern 
authorities  as  Harnack  and  Ramsay  rank  Luke  "in  the  first 
class  of  historians,  both  for  truthworthiness  in  his  details, 
and  in  his  judgment  for  selecting  the  subjects  which  are  of 
the  first  importance  and  must  be  treated  fully.  .  .  .  We 
may  feel  confident  that  he  showed  at  least  the  same  scrupu- 
lous accuracy  in  reporting  Christ's  teachings  as  he  did  in 
speaking  of  slight  secular  details."  '^' 

Luke  has  tolerated  no  carelessness  in  research  or  in  com- 
position. He  seems  to  be  dissatisfied  with  the  unchronolog- 
ical  arrangement  of  material  in  the  previous  gospel  nar- 
ratives, for  he  assures  Theophilus  that  he  will  write  events 
in  order."^^  It  probably  is  with  this  intent  that  he  con- 
cludes the  account  of  the  ministry  of  John  the  Baptist  be- 
fore he  begins  the  account  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus.*^^  We 
find  a  chronological  arrangement  throughout.  First,  we 
have  preliminary  and  introductory  material  (i.  i  to  4.  13). 
Then  follows  the  ministry  of  Jesus  in  Galilee  (4.  14  to 
9.  50).  Then  we  read  of  the  wider  ministry  outside  of 
Galilee  (9.  51  to  19.  28).  Then  come  the  closing  scenes 
in  Jerusalem  (19.  29  to  24.  53).  This  division  is  altogether 
according  to  time. 

Luke  is  careful  to  insert  the  proper  dates  upon  occasion. ^^ 

'•  I.  3,  4- 

"  Wilson,  Origins  and  Aims  of  the  Four  Gospels,  pp.  62-3. 

"1.3. 

"3-  18-20. 

•"l.  5;  2.  I,  2;  2.  21,  22;  2.  42;  3.  I,  2;  3.  23. 


2i8     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

The  Greek  word  for  "year,"  erog,  is  found  in  the  writ- 
ings of  Luke  twenty-six  times  and  in  all  the  other  books  of 
the  New  Testament  only  twenty-three  times.  The  Greek 
word  for  "month,"  fiTJv,  is  found  in  Luke's  writings  ten  times 
and  in  all  the  rest  of  the  New  Testament  only  eight  times. 
The  more  frequent  occurrence  of  these  words  in  his  writ- 
ings is  an  indication  of  Luke's  desire  to  be  more  accurate 
in  his  designations  of  time. 

(2)  Another  result  of  Luke's  university  training  is  evi- 
dent in  his  versatility.  Plummer  says :  "The  author  of  the 
third  Gospel  and  of  the  Acts  is  the  most  versatile  of  all 
the  New  Testament  writers.  He  can  be  as  Hebraistic  as  the 
seventy,  and  as  free  from  Hebraisms  as  Plutarch.  And,  in 
the  main,  whether  intentionally  or  not,  he  is  Hebraistic  in 
describing  Hebrew  society,  and  Greek  in  describing  Greek 
society."  ^^  It  demands  something  of  both  talent  and  train- 
ing to  make  such  transitions  of  style  possible. 

(3)  To  accuracy  and  versatility  we  may  add  fluency  as 
another  evidence  of  higher  education  and  broader  culture. 
An  untrained  man  may  be  very  prolix  in  verbal  statement  of 
facts,  but  if  he  is  set  to  write  them  down  he  is  apt  to  make 
very  short  work  of  it.  He  is  unaccustomed  to  the  task  of 
composition,  and  he  finds  it  very  difficult  for  him,  and  he 
confines  himself  to  the  recording  of  the  barest  outline  or 
the  main  essentials.  Other  things  being  equal,  facility  of 
expression  comes  with  practice,  and  an  educated  man  will 
have  had  that  practice  and  therefore  will  take  more  pleas- 
ure in  literary  composition.  He  will  be  ready  to  fill  out  the 
more  meager  outline  and  to  add  interesting  details  to  the 
essential  features  of  the  narrative.  He  will  give  us  a  fuller 
and  more  symmetrical  account.  When  we  compare  the 
Gospel  according  to  Luke  with  the  other  synoptics  we  find 
these  things  to  be  true  of  it. 

a.  It  is  a  more  comprehensive  account.    It  begins  with  the 


Plummer,  op.  (it.,  p.  xlix. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  219 

birth  of  the  Forerunner  and  all  the  interesting  events  con- 
nected therewith.  The  contents  of  the  first  two  chapters  are 
peculiar  to  Luke.  Mark  began  with  the  active  ministry  of 
John  the  Baptist.  Matthew  told  us  about  the  birth  of  Jesus. 
Luke  goes  back  of  these  events  to  find  the  beginning  of  the 
new  dispensation  in  the  prophecy  of  the  birth  of  John. 
Then  Luke  carries  his  narrative  beyond  that  of  any  of  the 
other  Gospels.  He  is  the  only  one  who  gives  us  any  ac- 
count of  the  ascension  of  Jesus,  which  would  surely  seem 
to  be  the  only  fitting  end  for  such  a  career  as  that  of  the 
Incarnate  One.  In  the  middle  of  his  Gospel  Luke  has  given 
us  a  large  section — 9.  45  to  18.  30 — the  most  of  the  material 
in  which  is  peculiar  to  him.  The  other  Gospels  pass  these 
events  over  in  silence,  and  yet  some  of  them  are  among  the 
most  remarkable  in  our  Lord's  ministry.  This  section  is 
usually  called  "the  greater  insertion"  in  the  gospel  narrative. 
Schleiermacher  called  it  "the  journey  account."  Others 
have  named  it  the  "Gnomology."  Altogether,  about  one 
third  of  the  contents  of  Luke  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  other 
Gospels. 

b.  As  the  most  comprehensive  account,  the  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  Luke  is  the  longest  of  the  four  Gospels.  It  has 
been  calculated  that  when  the  contents  of  the  synoptic  Gos- 
pels have  been  divided  into  one  hundred  and  seventy-two 
sections  Luke  has  one  hundred  and  twenty-seven,  or  about 
three  fourths  of  these ;  Matthew  has  one  hundred  and  four- 
teen, or  about  two  thirds;  and  Mark  has  eighty-four,  or 
about  one  half ;  and  of  these  one  hundred  and  seventy-two 
sections  Luke  has  forty-eight,  or  about  two  sevenths  peculiar 
to  himself ;  Matthew  has  twenty-two,  or  about  one  eighth ; 
and  Mark  has  five,  or  about  one  thirty-seventh. 

c.  There  are  twenty  miracles  recorded  in  this  Gospel,  and 
six  of  these  are  peculiar  to  Luke.  These  are:  The  miracu- 
lous draught  of  fishes,^^  the  raising  of  the  widow's  son  at 

"5.4-". 


220     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Nain,83  ^^g  healing  of  the  woman  bowed  together,*^  the  cure 
of  the  dropsical  man,^^  the  cleansing  of  the  ten  lepers,^® 
the  restoration  of  Malchus's  ear.^'^  Over  against  these  six 
miracles  peculiar  to  Luke,  Matthew  has  only  three  peculiar 
to  himself,  and  Mark  has  only  two.  Luke,  therefore,  has 
more  than  Matthew  and  Mark  combined. 

d.  There  are  twenty-three  parables  recorded  in  this  Gos- 
pel, and  of  these  eighteen  are  pecuHar  to  Luke.  These  are: 
The  two  debtors,s8  the  good  Samaritan,^^  the  importunate 
friend,^^  the  rich  fool,^^  the  watchful  servants,^^  t^g  barren 
fig  tree,93  the  chief  seats,^^  the  great  supper,^^  the  rash 
builder,96  the  rash  king,^'^  the  lost  coin,^^  the  lost  son,^^ 
the  unrighteous  steward,^^"  the  rich  man  and  Lazarus,^*^^ 
the  unprofitable  servants,!^^  the  unjust  judge,^^^  the  Phari- 
see and  pubUcan,!^^  the  pounds.^*'^  Over  against  these 
eighteen  parables  peculiar  to  Luke,  Matthew  has  only  ten 
and  Mark  has  only  one.  Therefore  Luke  has  over  a  third 
more  than  Matthew  and  Mark  combined. 

These  parables  seem  to  be  of  quite  a  different  character 
from  those  in  the  other  synoptics.  The  parables  in  the  first 
Gospel  had  to  do  chiefly  with  the  kingdom  and  its  laws. 
The  parables  in  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke  have  an  indi- 
vidual and  purely  human  interest.  They  are  more  personal 
and  more  concrete.  They  do  not  seem  so  much  like  types 
of  spiritual  phenomena  as  they  do  like  transcripts   from 

•=14.  16-24. 
"*  14.  28-30. 
"  14.  31.  32. 
''  15.  3-10. 
"15.  11-32. 
^•^16.  1-13. 
*"i6.  19-31. 
""  17.  7-10. 
^•^iS.  1-8. 
"*i8.  10-14. 
""19.  11-27. 


-7.  : 

11-17. 

"13. 

10-17. 

-14. 

1-7. 

-17. 

11-19. 

"22. 

50,  51. 

"7.. 

41-43. 

»»I0. 

25-37. 

•"ii. 

5-8. 

"12. 

16-21. 

•^12. 

35-48. 

''13. 

6-9. 

•*  14.  7-1 1. 

THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  221 

actual  life.  They  are  not  so  much  concerned  with  analogies 
from  nature  as  they  are  with  accurate  accounts  of  human 
nature.  They  do  not  idealize  human  nature.  They  repre- 
sent it  as  it  actually  is.  They  are  more  like  snapshots  at 
contemporary  occurrences.  They  are  stories  based  on  fact. 
They  have  to  do  with  real  men  and  women  and  the  com- 
mon things  of  daily  life. 

What  testimony  they  bear  to  the  freshness  and  originality 
of  the  conversation  of  Jesus!  Some  of  these  parables  are 
spoken  spontaneously  in  answer  to  some  question  put  at  him 
unexpectedly.  He  must  have  had  a  very  ready  wit  and  very 
unusual  powers  of  observation  to  produce  such  apt  illustra- 
tions of  his  truth  at  a  moment's  notice.  No  wonder  the 
common  people  heard  him  gladly.  He  talked  about  things 
which  they  knew,  and  showed  them  hidden  depths  of  wisdom 
where  they  had  seen  only  the  utterly  commonplace.  These 
parables  would  go  home  to  the  hearts  of  all.  They  showed 
the  way  of  salvation  from  the  materials  close  at  hand.  The 
truth  embodied  in  these  tales  could  be  appreciated  by  any- 
one. Their  simplicity  was  their  chief  charm.  Their  home- 
liness was  one  element  of  their  power. 

e.  Of  the  interesting  narratives  peculiar  to  Luke  we  may 
mention  as  examples  the  events  connected  with  the  birth  of 
John  the  Baptist  and  of  Jesus,  including  the  annunciation, 
the  story  of  the  shepherds,  the  meeting  with  Simeon  and 
with  Anna,i°^  the  temple  visit  at  the  age  of  twelve,^"'^  the 
scene  in  the  synagogue  at  Nazareth,^"^  the  feast  in  the  home 
of  Simon  the  Pharisee,^^^  the  intolerance  of  James  and 
John,*i°  the  story  of  Martha  and  Mary,^  the  story  of 
Zacchaeus,'i2  ^h^  story  of  the  penitent  thief, ^^^  and  the 
story  of  the  walk  to  Emmaus.^^^     The  mere  mention  of 

'"  10.  38-42. 
*"  19.  I-IO. 
"•23.  40-43. 
'"24.  13-35. 


'-I. 

5  to  2. 

40. 

'"2. 

41-52. 

-4. 

16-30. 

'-7. 

36-SO. 

"•9. 

49-54- 

222     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

these  narratives  and  miracles  and  parables  makes  it  evident 
at  once  that  the  greater  length  of  the  third  Gospel  is  not 
due  to  any  mere  padding  or  prolixity;  for  these  things  be- 
long to  the  most  precious  portions  of  the  record  of  the  life 
and  teaching  of  our  Lord.  Yet  the  longest  Gospel  might 
have  been  due  to  a  greater  abundance  of  material  on  hand 
or  to  a  greater  abundance  of  leisure  for  writing.  The  final 
and  crowning  test  of  an  educated  man's  composition  will 
be  found  in  his  literary  style.  To  accuracy,  versatility,  flu- 
ency does  Luke  add  beauty  of  literary  style? 

(4)  Renan  says  that  this  is  "the  most  literary  of  the  Gos- 
pels," and  he  adds  that  it  is  "a  beautiful  narrative,  well  con- 
trived, at  once  Hebraic  and  Hellenic,  uniting  the  emotion  of 
the  drama  with  the  serenity  of  the  idyl,"  ^^^ 

Notice  (a)  the  language  Luke  employs.  It  is  the  most 
beautiful  Greek  in  the  New  Testament,  with  the  possible  ex- 
ception of  that  found  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  Luke 
is  less  Hebraic  than  the  other  evangelists.  Yet  his  first  two 
chapters  have  a  stronger  Hebraic  coloring  than  any  other 
portion  of  the  New  Testament,  and  this  is  a  proof  either  of 
Luke's  personal  versatility  or  of  his  faithful  reproduction 
of  some  Hebraic  original  of  this  part  of  his  narrative. 
When  he  is  Hebraic  he  is  thoroughly  so ;  but  when  he  writes 
Greek  it  is  better  Greek  than  the  other  evangelists  could 
command;  and  where  he  is  most  independent  of  all  previous 
effort,  as  in  the  preface  to  his  own  narrative,  his  Greek 
is  of  the  finest  quality  and  merits  comparison  with  the 
best  of  the  classical  models.  Taking  the  Gospel  as  a  whole, 
its  Greek  will  be  found  to  stand  about  midway  between 
the  classical  perfection  of  the  ancients  and  the  common, 
or  Hellenistic,  Greek  of  Luke's  day.  It  is  the  Greek  of 
an  educated  man  as  distinguished  from  the  current  Greek 
of  ordinary  use. 

Notice  (b)  that  Luke  has  the  richest  vocabulary  of  any  of 


"'  Renan,  op.  cit.,  p.  282. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  223 

the  gospel  writers.  The  words  peculiar  to  Luke  in  the  New 
Testament  are  variously  estimated,  according  to  various 
readings  of  the  text,  from  seven  hundred  and  fifty  to  eight 
hundred  and  fifty-one;  and  in  the  Gospel  from  two  hundred 
and  sixty-one  to  three  hundred  and  twelve  of  these  occur. 
Matthew  has  only  seventy  words  peculiar  to  him  in  the  New 
Testament,  Mark  forty-four,  and  John  fifty.  The  richness 
of  a  man's  vocabulary  is  usually  a  very  fair  measure  of  the 
degree  of  his  culture.  The  uneducated  man  has  a  very  lim- 
ited fund  of  words  at  his  command.  The  well-read  and 
well-trained  man  is  adding  continually  to  his  supply. 

Notice  (c)  the  very  effective  contrasts  which  are  char- 
acteristic of  Luke's  grouping  of  his  material.  All  through 
the  Gospel  we  find  two  opposing  characters  set  side  by  side, 
that  we  may  see  them  together  and  mark  the  difference  be- 
tween them.  There  are  the  two  annunciations  in  the  begin- 
ning, to  Zacharias  slow  to  believe  and  to  Mary  the  in- 
stantly obedient.  Then  follow  such  contrasts  as  those 
offered  by  Simon  and  the  sinful  woman,  Martha  and  Mary, 
the  ungrateful  Jewish  lepers  and  the  grateful  Samaritan, 
the  unneighborly  Levite  and  priest  and  the  neighborly 
Samaritan,  the  Pharisee  and  the  publican,  the  rich  man  and 
Lazarus,  the  prodigal  and  his  elder  brother,  the  sleepy  and 
surly  friend  and  the  sleepless  and  gracious  God,  the  unjust 
judge  and  the  loving  Father  of  all,  the  hostile  priesthood 
and  the  hearkening  people,  the  work  of  Jesus  and  the  work 
of  the  devil,  and  the  blessings  and  the  woes  of  the  Sermon 
on  the  Plain. 

Sanday  says  that  Luke  has  more  literary  ambition  than 
his  fellows.^^®  Ramsay  declares  that  he  "brings  to  the  treat- 
ment of  his  subjects  genius,  literary  skill,  and  sympathetic 
historical  insight."  Plummer  says:  "He  possesses  the  art 
of  composition.  He  knows  not  only  how  to  tell  a  tale  truth- 
fully, but  how  to  tell  it  with  effect.    ...   As  the  fine  liter- 


'  Book  by  Book,  p.  401. 


224     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

ary  taste  of  Renan  affirms,  it  is  the  most  beautiful  book  in 
the  world."  "^ 

3.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  the  Physician. 

If  Paul  had  not  told  us  that  Luke  was  a  physician  we 
could  have  been  assured  of  it  from  the  internal  evidence 
afforded  in  his  writing.  ( i )  This  is  apparent  in  his  frequent 
references  to  the  healing  work  of  Jesus.^^^ 

(2)  Luke  is  the  only  one  of  the  evangelists  to  record  the 
surgical  miracle  of  the  healing  of  Malchus's  ear.^^^ 

(3)  Of  the  six  miracles  recorded  by  Luke  alone,  five  are 
miracles  of  healing,  if  we  include  among  them  the  raising  of 
the  widow's  son  at  Nain.^^o  -pj^g  fQ^j-  others  are,  the  heal- 
ing of  the  woman  who  had  a  spirit  of  infirmity  for  eighteen 
years,^2i  ^nd  of  the  man  afflicted  with  the  dropsy,^22  ^he 
cleansing  of  the  ten  lepers, ^^s  2ca6.  the  restoration  of 
Malchus's  mutilated  ear.^24 

(4)  Luke  alone  quotes  the  proverb  from  the  lips  of  Jesus, 
"Physician,  heal  thyself"  ;^25  ^nd  he  tells  us  that  Jesus  de- 
clared that  this  title  of  "Physician"  would  be  popularly  ap- 
plied to  him  in  his  work. 

(5)  Luke  is  more  circumstantial  in  his  description  of 
diseases  than  any  other  writer  in  the  New  Testament,  as  in 
Luke  4.  8;  5.  12;  22.  44;  Acts  3.  7;  9.  18;  10.  9,  10;  12.  23; 
28.8. 

(6)  Luke  frequently  gives  us  the  symptoms  of  disease 
and  the  duration  of  the  sickness,  and  marks  for  us  the  stages 
of  the  patient's  recovery.  He  seems  to  distinguish  between 
cases  of  possession  and  ordinary  forms  of  physical  infir- 
mity, as  in  6.  17,  18. 

(7)  It  has  been  noted  that  the  Gospel  of  the  physician  is 
also  the  Gospel  of  the  psychologist.    Where  Mark  tells  us 


"^Plummer,  op.  cit.,  xlvi. 

^^14.  1-6. 

"*4.  18;  9.  I ;  9.  2;  9.  6;  10.  9. 

^^17.  11-19. 

"•22.  SI. 

"*22.   51. 

-7.  11-17. 

"^4.  23. 

*"i3.  10-17. 

THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  225 

only  about  outward  actions  and  looks,  Luke  makes  some 
comment  concerning  the  mental  attitude  involved,  as  in 
3.  15;  6.  II ;  7.  39.  A  skillful  physician  will  look  beyond 
external  symptoms  to  the  mental  phenomena.  It  is  char- 
acteristic of  our  own  age  that  more  attention  than  formerly 
was  believed  necessary  is  now  given  to  the  state  of  the  mind 
in  the  treatment  of  all  disease.  But  all  first-class  physicians 
have  always  been  more  or  less  interested  in  psychology  as 
an  aid  in  their  work ;  and  Luke  appears  to  have  belonged  in 
this  class. 

Strange  and  unexpected  touches  occur  in  Luke's  nar- 
rative, corresponding  to  the  astonishing  and  inexplicable 
psychological  experiences  of  ordinary  life.  Peter  is  amazed 
at  the  wonder-working  power  displayed  by  the  Lord  in 
the  miraculous  draught  of  fishes,  and  he  is  never  more 
determined  to  cleave  to  this  new  Master  through  sunshine 
and  storm.  Yet  what  does  he  do  ?  The  most  foolish  and  in- 
explicable thing.  He  falls  at  the  knees  of  Jesus  and  cries 
"Depart  from  me ;  for  I  am  a  sinful  man,  O  Lord."  ^^e 
How  could  Jesus  depart  from  him?  They  were  in  a  boat, 
out  on  the  water.  It  was  not  convenient  for  anyone  to 
leave  that  boat  just  at  that  moment.  Moreover,  Peter  did 
not  wish  for  Jesus  to  depart  anyway.  It  would  have  been 
more  becoming  for  him  to  go  away,  if  anybody  had  to  leave, 
than  for  him  to  order  the  Master  to  depart  from  him.  It 
was  all  utterly  foolish  and  inexcusable,  just  as  the  psycho- 
logical processes  of  such  a  mind  as  Peter's  so  often  are. 

The  risen  Lord  appeared  among  his  disciples,  and  showed 
them  his  hands  and  his  feet,  that  they  might  be  convinced  of 
his  identity.  It  is  Luke  who  puts  down  that  extraordinary 
statement  at  that  point.  "They  yet  beHeved  not  for  joy."  ^^7 
What  a  natural  touch  that  was!  They  believed  it,  and  yet 
it  was  too  good  to  be  true. 

The  Lord  had  ascended  into  heaven,  and  the  disciples 

""5.8,9. 
"'24.  41. 


226     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

were  to  see  him  no  more.  Luke  makes  that  statement  of 
fact  and  then  ends  the  book  with  the  astonishing  comment 
that  the  disciples  "worshiped  him,  and  returned  to  Jeru- 
salem with  great  joy:  and  were  continually  in  the  temple, 
blessing  God."  ^^^  No  loud  lamentation,  no  rending  of  their 
garments,  no  forty-day  period  of  mourning;  nothing  but 
praise  and  joy! 

(8)  There  is  an  indication  that  the  writer  of  the  third 
Gospel  and  the  book  of  Acts  is  a  physician  which  is  all- 
sufficient  in  itself,  and  which  has  seemed  to  most  people  to 
be  altogether  conclusive  in  the  matter.  These  books  are 
filled  with  technical  medical  terms,  such  as  can  be  paralleled 
only  in  the  writings  of  men  in  the  medical  profession  itself. 
The  Rev.  W.  K.  Hobart  has  written  a  volume  of  more  than 
three  hundred  pages  entitled  The  Medical  Language  of 
Luke,  in  which  he  has  made  a  list  of  some  four  hundred 
terms  used  more  frequently  by  Luke  than  by  others,  or  used 
by  Luke  alone  among  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament, 
and  found  also  in  the  Greek  medical  writers.  Some  of  these 
are  purely  technical  terms,  not  likely  to  be  in  use  anywhere 
except  in  professional  circles.^^o  j^  ig.  25,  where  Mark  and 
Matthew  have  the  more  common  word  for  "needle,"  pa<pk, 
Luke  uses  the  word  for  the  surgical  needle,  PeXovr}.  In 
Acts  13.  II  Luke  uses  a  word  for  a  disease  of  the  eye,  oc- 
curring frequently  in  Galen,  but  found  nowhere  else  in  our 
New  Testament  or  the  Septuagint,  a^'^^?* 

Of  course,  all  people  are  apt  to  use  medical  phraseology 
sometimes.  The  apostle  Paul  has  many  medical  metaphors 
in  his  epistles.  It  has  been  an  interesting  subject  for  dis- 
cussion and  investigation  as  to  how  far  Paul's  companion- 
ship with  Luke  the  physician  may  have  been  responsible  for 
these  medical  terms  in  his  usage.  However,  no  one  is  apt 
to  use  these  medical  terms  and  phrases  continually  ex- 
cept a  medical  man.    Such  a  man  will  use  them,  not  only 

"^24.  52,  53. 

"^4-  38,  39;  16.  19-26. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  227 

in  the  technical  description  of  disease,  but  even  in  reference 
to  the  affairs  of  ordinary  life.  Now,  the  abundance  of  the 
medical  terms  in  the  third  Gospel  distinguishes  it  from  all 
the  others  as  the  work  of  a  physician,  and  nearly  one  hun- 
dred of  these  terms  are  such  as  only  a  physician  might  be 
expected  to  use. 

Hamack  gives  pages  of  evidence  on  this  subject  which 
he  sums  up  in  these  words:  "When  a  physician  writes  a 
historical  work  it  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  his  profes- 
sion shows  itself  in  his  writing;  yet  it  is  only  natural  for  one 
to  look  for  traces  of  the  author's  medical  profession  in  such 
a  work.  These  traces  may  be  of  different  kinds:  (i)  the 
whole  character  of  the  narrative  may  be  determined  by 
points  of  view,  aims,  and  ideals  which  are  more  or  less 
medical  (disease  and  its  treatment) ;  (2)  marked  prefer- 
ence may  be  shown  for  stories  concerning  the  healing  of 
diseases,  which  stories  may  be  given  in  great  number  and 
detail;  (3)  the  language  may  be  colored  by  the  language  of 
physicians  (medical  technical  terms,  metaphors  of  medical 
character,  etc.).  All  these  three  groups  of  characteristic 
signs  are  found  in  the  historical  work  which  bears  the  name 
of  Luke.  Here,  however,  it  may  be  objected  that  the  sub- 
ject-matter itself  is  responsible  for  these  traits,  so  that  their 
evidence  is  not  decisive  for  the  medical  calling  of  the  author. 
Jesus  appeared  as  a  great  physician  and  healer.  All  the 
evangelists  say  this  of  him ;  hence  it  is  not  surprising  that 
one  of  them  has  set  this  phase  of  his  ministry  in  the  fore- 
ground, and  has  regarded  it  as  the  most  important.  Our 
evangelist  need  not,  therefore,  have  been  a  physician,  espe- 
cially if  he  were  a  Greek,  seeing  that  in  those  days  Greeks 
with  religious  interests  were  disposed  to  regard  religion 
mainly  under  the  category  of  healing  and  salvation.  This 
is  true;  yet  such  a  combination  of  characteristic  signs  will 
compel  us  to  believe  that  the  author  was  a  physician  if  (4) 
the  description  of  the  particular  cases  of  disease  shows  dis- 
tinct traces  of  medical  diagnosis  and  scientific  knowledge; 


228     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

(5)  if  the  language,  even  where  questions  of  medicine  or  of 
heahng  are  not  touched  upon,  is  colored  by  medical  phrase- 
ology; and  (6)  if  in  those  passages  where  the  author  speaks 
as  an  eyewitness  medical  traits  are  especially  and  prominently 
apparent.  These  three  kinds  of  tokens  are  also  found  in  the 
historical  work  of  our  author.  It  is,  accordingly,  proved 
that  it  proceeds  from  the  pen  of  a  physician."  i^o  xhig 
puts  the  truth  as  clearly  as  it  may  be  stated.  Those  who  are 
interested  in  the  proof  in  detail  will  find  it  in  the  pages  of 
Hobart  and  Harnack. 

(9)  With  these  facts  in  mind  it  is  interesting  to  notice  one 
difference  between  Mark's  account  and  Luke's  account  of 
the  woman  who  was  healed  by  touching  the  hem  of  the 
garment  of  Jesus.  Mark  tells  us  that  "she  had  suffered 
many  things  of  many  physicians,  and  had  spent  all  that 
she  had,  and  was  nothing  bettered,  but  rather  grew 
worse."  ^31  That,  surely,  is  a  bad  showing  for  the  medical 
profession.  Would  Luke  be  likely  to  write  down  such  an 
indictment  of  his  own  calling  in  life?  We  turn  to  his  ac- 
count^^2  and  we  find  that  in  the  Vatican  manuscript  and  the 
Westcott  and  Hort  text  and  the  margin  of  the  Revised  Ver- 
sion Luke  omits  all  these  severe  reflections  upon  the  phy- 
sicians and  contents  himself  with  the  simple  statement,  "She 
was  not  able  to  be  healed  by  any."  This  is  hardly  an  ade- 
quate translation.  What  Luke  really  means  to  say  is  that 
the  woman  lacked  all  vital  energy  in  herself,  so  that  she 
seemed  to  be  beyond  the  hope  of  any  favorable  response  to 
medical  treatment.  It  was  a  case  of  chronic  debility  so  pro- 
nounced that  nothing  seemed  to  be  left  for  a  physician  to 
build  upon.  It  was  not  the  fault  of  the  physicians  that  she 
could  not  be  cured.  It  was  her  own  condition  which  seemed 
incurable.  Luke,  the  physician,  would  not  have  been  likely 
to  write  any  of  those  things  recorded  by  Mark.     Some  of 

'**  Harnack,  Luke  the  Physician,  pp.  175,  176. 
"^  5.  25,  26. 
'■^8.  43. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  229 

the  old  manuscripts  retain  the  clause  in  the  text  of  Luke, 
"and  she  had  spent  all  her  living  upon  physicians,"  but  it 
is  better  to  omit  it,  as  Westcott  and  Hort  have  done. 

(10)  We  notice  in  closing  this  list  of  the  evidences  in  the 
writings  of  Luke  that  they  are  the  product  of  one  who  repre- 
sents the  point  of  view  of  the  medical  profession,  that  almost 
the  last  words  Luke  has  written  at  the  close  of  the  book  of 
Acts  consist  of  a  quotation  from  Isaiah  ending  with  the 
words,  "and  I  will  heal  them."  ^^3  It  is  the  healing  power 
of  Jehovah  upon  which  he  lays  emphasis  last.  Here,  then, 
we  have  a  hst  of  ten  of  the  direct  evidences  of  his  profes- 
sional calling  to  be  found  in  the  writings  of  Luke.  They 
are  cumulative  in  eflfect,  and,  taking  them  all  together,  we 
are  disposed  to  be  exceedingly  glad  that  one  of  our  Gospels 
was  written  by  a  Gentile,  and  that  he  was  an  educated  man 
and  that  his  profession  was  that  of  a  physician. 

When  we  turn  from  the  direct  evidences  to  those  which 
are  more  indirect  we  find  this  feeling  enhanced.  A  physi- 
cian, like  an  evangelist  or  any  true  minister  of  the  gospel, 
must  be  no  respecter  of  persons.  He  must  be  interested  in 
all  classes  alike,  and  must  devote  himself  to  the  helping  and 
healing  of  all.  But  there  is  one  class  in  which  the  physician 
as  a  professional  man  is  more  interested  than  the  lawyer  or 
the  preacher  or  any  other  servant  of  society.  That  is  the 
class  of  the  very  young. 

The  physician  ought  to  be  expert  in  the  diseases  of  in- 
fancy. It  is  a  part  of  his  duty  to  help  the  little  ones  through 
the  period  of  their  greatest  helplessness  and  infirmity  into 
good  health  and  vigorous  physical  life.  The  sympathy  and 
love  of  the  physician's  heart  goes  out  continually  to  the  inno- 
cent and  helpless  lambs  of  the  flock.  Now,  it  surely  is  char- 
acteristic of  the  third  Gospel  that  more  than  the  others  it  is 
interested  in  the  little  folks. 

4.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Childhood. 

It  is  a  strange  fact  that  there  is  not  a  child  in  the  fourth 

•"28.  27. 


230     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Gospel  from  beginning  to  end.  If  that  were  the  only  pic- 
ture we  had  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus  all  the  children  would 
have  disappeared  from  it  and  all  the  children  might  have  felt 
that  they  had  no  share  in  it  to-day.  On  the  contrary,  the 
third  Gospel  is  the  Gospel  of  childhood. 

(i)  Luke  alone  tells  us  about  the  birth  and  infancy  of 
John  the  Baptist,  and  all  the  marvels  connected  with  it,  the 
annunciation  to  Zacharias  in  the  temple,  the  paralysis  of 
the  tongue  of  that  unbeliever,  the  miraculous  quickening  of 
Elisabeth  in  her  old  age,  the  restoration  of  the  power  of 
speech  to  Zacharias  at  the  time  of  the  birth  of  his  son,  and 
the  use  he  made  of  it  in  singing  a  psalm  of  praise  to  God. 
This  birth  in  old  age,  this  temporary  dumbness,  and  this 
loosening  of  a  paralyzed  tongue  are  all  of  interest  to 
the  physician  as  well  as  to  the  writer  of  the  gospel 
history. 

(2)  Matthew  tells  us  something  about  the  birth  of  Jesus, 
but  Luke  adds  the  story  of  the  annunciation  to  Mary,  the 
visit  to  Elisabeth,  the  singing  of  the  Magnificat,  the  herald- 
ing of  the  heavenly  host,  the  visit  of  the  shepherds,  the  cir- 
cumcision, the  purification,  the  meeting  with  Simeon  and 
Anna,  the  child's  growth  in  wisdom  and  stature  and  grace, 
and  the  twelve-year-old  boy's  interest  in  the  temple  and  its 
teachers  of  the  law. 

(3)  Mark  and  Matthew  told  us  how  they  brought  little 
children  to  Jesus,  but  Luke  tells  us  that  these  little  ones  were 
babes,  rd  fiQitpr].  They  were  innocent,  helpless,  clinging,  de- 
pendent, trustful  infants  in  their  mothers'  arms  of  whom 
Jesus  said,  "To  such  belongeth  the  kingdom  of  God."  ^^^ 
The  first  two  chapters  of  the  third  Gospel  always  will  be 
the  chapters  we  shall  most  delight  to  read  to  the  children 
and  the  chapters  which  the  children  will  be  most  delighted 
to  hear.  They  always  will  love  best  the  Gospel  with  the 
story  of  the  shepherds  and  the  angels,  the  Gospel  which  tells 
how  Jesus  allowed  the  mothers  to  bring  their  babies  to  him, 

'»*Luke  18.  15-17. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  231 

the  Gospel  written  by  the  beloved  physician  who  loved  the 
little  folks  and  so  thought  it  worth  while  to  write  a  part  of 
his  story  for  them. 

5.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Womanhood. 

A  physician  because  of  his  profession  is  brought  into 
more  confidential  relations  with  women  than  any  other  pro- 
fessional man  is  likely  to  be.  A  lawyer  probably  will  deal 
most  of  the  time  with  men.  A  minister  ought  to  be  inter- 
ested equally  in  the  men  and  the  women  of  his  community. 
But  since,  apart  from  helpless  infancy,  woman  physically  is 
the  weaker  vessel,  a  physician  is  apt  to  find  that  the  most  of 
his  time  and  attention  is  occupied  with  the  care  of  women 
and  children ;  and  if  he  is  of  a  naturally  kindly  disposition 
he  will  find  his  sympathies  going  out  to  these  in  large 
measure,  and  as  he  becomes  beloved  and  trusted,  he  will 
find  that  their  confidence  is  given  to  him  as  to  no  other 
professional  man.  The  third  Gospel  has  many  items  of 
intimate  information  concerning  women  which  may  have 
come  to  Luke  in  this  way.  There  is  such  a  number  of 
these  that  the  third  Gospel  has  come  to  be  called  the  "Gos- 
pel of  Womanhood."  We  note  some  of  the  reasons  for  giv- 
ing it  this  title. 

(i)  Luke  tells  us  more  about  women  than  the  other 
synoptics  combined.  The  word  yvvri,  "woman,"  occurs  in 
Mark  and  Matthew  forty-nine  times,  and  in  Luke  alone 
forty-three  times,  almost  as  many  times  as  in  the  two  others 
put  together.  The  pages  of  this  Gospel  are  filled  with  the 
figures  of  women,  and  some  of  them  are  not  to  be  found  in 
the  other  Gospels  at  all. 

(2)  We  are  indebted  to  Luke  alone  for  much  of  our  in- 
formation concerning  the  Virgin  Mary.  The  old  tradition 
which  declared  that  Luke  was  a  painter,  and  that  he  had 
painted  the  portrait  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  was  not  so  far 
wrong  after  all,  for  it  is  from  the  pages  of  Luke  that  we  are 
able  to  reproduce  any  satisfying  portrait  of  the  Virgin 
Mary  to-day.    Mark  mentioned  her  name,  and  Matthew  told 


232     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

us  something  about  the  trouble  she  had  with  Joseph,  who 
was  minded  to  put  her  away;  but  it  is  in  Luke's  narrative 
alone  that  we  are  permitted  to  see  the  events  circling  about 
the  birth  of  the  God-Man  from  the  standpoint  of  the  human 
mother  involved  in  the  great  mystery.  Luke  alone  tells  us 
about  the  annunciation  to  Mary,  and  we  have  a  glimpse  of 
that  moment  of  transcendent  revelation  to  the  Virgin  who 
was  to  bear  a  Child,  some  inkling  of  the  profound  perplexity 
into  which  she  was  inevitably  thrown,  some  conception  of 
the  absolute  sublimity  of  self-surrender  to  that  sword  which 
was  to  pierce  her  soul  and  to  that  exaltation  over  all  woman- 
kind forevermore. 

Luke  has  pictured  for  us  Mary  the  maid  and  Mary  the 
mother  as  the  type  of  perfect  womanhood.  She  has  been 
worshiped  by  multitudes  of  Christians,  and  she  has  been 
reverenced  by  all  the  disciples  of  Jesus  as  the  pure  Virgin 
who  bore  our  Lord  and  the  saintly  mother  who  trained  the 
Child  in  the  ways  of  righteousness  in  the  Nazareth  home. 
In  Luke  we  see  Mary  hastening  away  to  her  kinswoman, 
EHsabeth,  that  she  may  pour  into  the  ear  of  that  older  and 
trusted  friend  all  her  tale  of  high  favor  and  great  grief.  In 
Luke  we  hear  Mary  singing  the  Magnificat,  that  sponta- 
neous outburst  of  the  maiden's  overflowing  thanksgiving  to 
God: 

"My  soul  doth  magnify  the  Lord, 
And  my  spirit  hath  rejoiced  in  God  my  Saviour. 
For  he  hath  looked  upon  the  low  estate  of  his  handmaid : 
For  behold,  from  henceforth  all  generations  shall  call  me 
blessed."  "5 

In  Luke  alone  we  have  a  glimpse  of  the  mother  laying 
the  Child  in  the  manger  and  receiving  the  shepherds  with 
modest  dignity  and  listening  to  their  tale  of  angel  messages 
and  songs,  and  then  treasuring  these  things  in  her  heart 

"^  I.  46-48. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  233 

through  all  the  long  days  and  years.  In  Luke  we  see  her  in 
the  temple,  bringing  the  appointed  sacrifice  of  the  poor,  and 
meeting  Simeon  and  Anna,  and  hearing  the  prophecy  of  her 
own  woe  and  the  redemption  to  be  accomplished  through 
her  son.  In  Luke  we  read  of  Mary  searching  through  the 
caravan  and  then  through  the  sacred  city  for  the  twelve- 
year-old  Boy  who  had  strangely  disappeared,  but  who  told 
her  when  he  had  been  discovered  that  the  temple  was  the 
only  place  in  which  they  need  have  looked  for  him.  Then 
we  read  again  that  Mary  kept  all  these  sayings  in  her  heart. 

Tradition  said  that  Luke  painted  the  portrait  of  Mary  and 
carried  it  with  him  in  his  evangelistic  labors,  and  that  mir- 
acles were  wrought  by  means  of  it,  and  that  it  greatly 
helped  him  in  his  preaching.  It  has  been  an  aid  to  gospel 
preaching  through  all  the  centuries  that  Luke  has  given  us 
in  this  book  the  picture  of  this  maid  and  mother  who 
serves  as  a  type  of  model  womanhood.  But  there  are 
other  women  in  these  pages  besides  this  mother  of  our 
Lord. 

(3)  Luke  tells  us  all  that  we  know  about  the  cousin  of 
the  Virgin  Mary,  the  saintly  Elisabeth,  the  one  to  whom 
the  Virgin  turned  first  for  confidence  and  consolation  in  the 
hour  of  her  great  trouble  and  joy. 

(4)  Luke  tells  us  about  the  saintly  prophetess  Anna,  one 
of  the  quiet  of  the  land,  worshiping  and  fasting  and  praying 
night  and  day  in  the  temple  and  waiting  for  the  coming  of 
the  Lord.  There  they  stand  in  those  first  two  chapters: 
the  saintly  Virgin,  the  saintly  wife,  and  the  saintly  widow 
— Mary,  Elisabeth,  Anna — bearing  their  witness  that  now 
a  new  gospel  to  saintly  womanhood  had  come  into  the  world. 

(5)  Luke  tells  us  of  that  company  of  women  who  min- 
istered of  their  substance  to  the  twelve  and  their  Master, 
because  they  had  been  healed  of  evil  spirits  and  infirmities 
— Mary  of  Magdala,  Joanna,  Susanna,  and  many  others.^^e 
It  is  Luke  alone  who  gives  us  this  picture  of  Jesus,  "accom- 

■"8.  2,  3. 


234     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

panied  in  his  mission  journeys — not  by  warriors  like  David, 
not  by  elders  like  Moses,  not  by  kings  and  princes  like  the 
Herods — but  by  a  most  humble  band  of  ministering  wo- 
men." ^37  "The  Teacher  who  included  in  his  church  the 
humble,  the  distressed,  and  the  repentant,  is  attended  by 
the  weak  and  loving  rather  than  by  a  council  of  elders,  a 
band  of  warriors,  or  a  school  of  prophets."  ^^^  "The 
scribes  and  Pharisees  gathered  up  their  robes  in  the  streets 
and  the  synagogues,  lest  they  should  touch  a  woman,  and 
held  it  a  crime  to  look  on  an  unveiled  woman  in  public ;  our 
Lord  suffered  a  woman  to  minister  to' him  out  of  whom  he 
had  cast  seven  devils."  ^^^ 

(6)  Luke  has  given  us  that  picture  of  the  visit  of  Jesus 
to  the  home  of  Martha  and  Mary,  and  a  glimpse  at  the  typ- 
ically different  characters  of  those  two  sister  disciples.^**^ 

(7)  Luke  tells  us  of  the  widow  of  Nain  and  how  the  com- 
ing of  Jesus  turned  her  mourning  into  joy.  The  Lord  had 
compassion  upon  her  and  said  to  her,  "Weep  not."  ^^^ 

(8)  The  evangelist  Luke  has  recorded  the  parable  of  the 
importunate  widow  and  the  unjust  judge.i*^  These  three 
widows — Anna,  praying  in  the  temple;  the  weeping  widow 
at  Nain;  the  impatient,  persistent,  pestiferous  widow  of  the 
parable — appear  in  the  third  Gospel  alone  and  are  in  them- 
selves sufficient  to  make  this  "Gospel  of  Womanhood"  a 
"Gospel  of  Widowhood"  as  well.  A  worshiping  widow, 
a  weeping  widow,  a  wrangling  widow;  a  saintly  widow,  a 
sorrowing  widow,  an  insufferable  widow;  a  widow  eighty- 
four  years  in  saintly  and  patient  expectation  of  the  coming 
of  her  Lord,  an  unfortunate  widow  mourning  the  loss  of 
her  only  son,  an  importunate  widow  in  as  full  contrast  with 


Farrar,  Messages  of  the  Books,  p.  81. 
'  Bishop  Westcott. 
'  Schaff,  op.  cit.,  p.  663. 
'10.  38-42. 

'7-  11-15. 
'  18.  1-8. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  235 

the  quiet  and  patient  saints  of  the  Lord  as  the  unjust  judge 
is  in  contrast  with  the  loving  and  patient  Father  of  all.  We 
owe  the  pictures  of  these  three  widows  to  Luke  alone. 

(9)  Luke  tells  us  of  the  healing  of  that  daughter  of 
Abraham,  whom  Satan  had  bound  for  eighteen  years.^^^ 
The  ruler  of  the  synagogue  was  moved  with  great  indigna- 
tion that  day,  but  Jesus  lifted  the  burden  from  that  woman's 
shoulders,  loosened  the  bonds  which  had  bowed  her  together 
for  years,  and  permitted  her  to  stand  straight  and  glorify 
God  before  them  all.  The  miracle  might  be  taken  as  a  par- 
able of  the  change  Christianity  has  wrought  in  the  condition 
of  womanhood  in  the  world.  Woman  is  no  longer  bound 
and  bowed;  at  the  word  of  Jesus  she  stands  straight. 
Wherever  the  ministry  of  Jesus  has  come  she  has  been  made 
to  glorify  God. 

(10)  Luke  has  given  us  that  story  of  the  anointing  of 
Jesus  by  the  woman  who  had  been  a  sinner,  at  the  feast  in 
the  house  of  Simon  the  Pharisee.^**  Could  we  lose  out  of 
the  gospel  story  the  parable  of  the  two  debtors  and  this 
whole  picture  of  the  relation  between  our  compassionate 
Lord  and  all  truly  repentant  souls?  This  woman  had 
sinned,  but  her  love  had  won  forgiveness;  she  had  sinned, 
but  his  love  had  made  her  clean.  He  accepted  the  sacri- 
fice her  affection  was  so  willing  to  make ;  he  did  not  repulse 
her  before  the  throng;  he  acknowledged  their  previous  rela- 
tionship ;  he  promised  her  that  she  might  go  in  peace.  There 
is  all  the  union  of  purity  and  compassion,  of  dignity  and 
genuine  affection  which  we  would  expect  to  find  in  the 
loving  Saviour  of  men.  Luke  alone  has  given  us  this  nar- 
rative.^**^ 

(11)  Ift  the  other  Gospels  we  read  how  Jesus  defended 

'*•  13.  10-17. 

'"7.36-50. 

"'For  the  reasons  for  concluding  that  this  narrative  has  no 
parallel  in  the  other  Gospels,  see  Andrews,  The  Life  of  Our  Lord, 
pp.  281-286. 


236     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

himself  against  the  blasphemous  charge  of  the  Pharisees 
that  he  was  in  league  with  Beelzebub,  but  it  is  Luke  alone 
who  records  the  fact  that  at  the  close  of  that  defense  some 
warmhearted  woman  in  the  throng  lifted  up  her  voice 
impulsively  in  defiance  of  his  enemies  and  in  utter  loyalty  to 
him,  saying,  "Blessed  is  the  womb  that  bare  thee,  and  the 
breasts  which  thou  didst  suck."  ^^^  It  was  a  blessing  pro- 
nounced upon  Mary  the  mother,  but  it  was  a  woman's 
tribute  to  the  greatness  and  the  goodness  of  Mary's  Son. 

(12)  Luke  tells  us  that  on  the  way  to  the  cross  a  multi- 
tude of  women  followed  him,  weeping  and  lamenting  his 
fate;  but  Jesus  turned  to  them  and  said,  "Daughters  of 
Jerusalem,  weep  not  for  me,  but  weep  for  yourselves  and 
your  children."  i*"^  His  compassion  for  the  women  and  for 
the  little  ones  was  dominant  within  him  to  the  very  last. 

(13)  Epiphanius  tells  us  that  in  Marcion's  version  of  the 
Gospel  according  to  Luke  he  had  inserted  as  a  part  of  the 
charge  made  by  the  Jews  against  Jesus  in  the  trial  before 
Pilate,  "This  man  perverts  the  women  and  the  children." 
The  insertion  bears  its  witness  to  the  attraction  which  the 
personality  of  Jesus  must  always  have  had  for  these  more 
dependent  classes  of  society.  The  children  loved  him  and 
followed  him.  The  women  ministered  to  him  gladly  of  their 
substance.  Doubtless  there  were  some  of  the  Jews  who 
thought  it  would  be  better  for  their  wives  to  stay  at  home 
and  to  learn  from  their  husbands  in  silence  and  seclusion 
and  subjection  there  rather  than  to  be  running  about  the 
country  after  this  new  teacher  and  squandering  their  means 
in  the  support  of  him  and  his  able-bodied  but  idle  attendants. 
Doubtless  there  were  some  fathers  who  wondered  why  their 
children  did  not  run  to  them  so  gladly  and  listen  to  them  so 
eagerly  as  they  did  to  this  stranger ;  and  it  must  have  seemed 
to  them  that  their  families  were  being  perverted,  and  it 
would  be  just  as  well  for  this  man  to  be  put  out  of  the 

»*'ii.  27. 
*"23.  27,  28. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  237 

way.  They  were  right  in  thinking  that  a  revolution  was  im- 
pending in  those  days.  They  were  wrong  in  thinking  that 
the  death  of  Jesus  would  put  an  end  to  it. 

The  rights  of  childhood  had  been  recognized  once  for 
all.  The  emancipation  of  womanhood  had  been  proclaimed 
for  all  time  to  come.  The  Saviour  of  the  world  was  to  be 
the  Saviour  of  women  and  the  Saviour  of  the  little  ones. 
Henceforth  they  would  follow  him  into  the  kingdom  of  God. 
The  beloved  physician  has  given  us  in  his  Gospel  this  picture 
of  the  compassionate  Christ,  interested  like  himself  in  these 
weaker  and  more  helpless  members  of  society,  and  beloved 
like  himself  by  those  to  whom  he  gave  his  ceaseless  sym- 
pathy and  service. 

6.  This  is  The  Gospel  for  the  Poor. 

A  good  physician  is  ready  to  respond  to  any  cry  of  need. 
His  professional  knowledge  is  at  the  service  of  all.  He  can 
be  no  respecter  of  persons  in  his  practice.  He  must  give  as 
much  attention  to  the  needs  of  his  poor  patients  as  he  does 
to  those  of  the  rich.  A  beloved  physician  will  be  a  philan- 
thropist, a  lover  of  man  as  man.  The  physician  who  works 
only  for  fat  fees  and  who  goes  only  when  summoned  by  the 
well-to-do  may  make  his  fortune,  but  he  will  miss  his  great- 
est professional  opportunity  in  the  service  of  the  poor.  The 
poor  people  are  in  the  majority,  and  when  they  are  sick  their 
need  of  a  good  physician  is  greater  than  that  of  the  com- 
fortable and  rich.  With  unskillful  nursing  and  unsanitary 
surroundings  and  unwholesome  food  all  the  resources  of  the 
physician  are  taxed  to  the  utmost  to  save  the  life ;  and  a  good 
physician  finds  that  his  sympathies  are  poured  out  in  the 
effort  to  help  the  needy  poor. 

Luke  was  such  a  good  physician.  He  lived  and  died  a 
poor  man,  and  he  gave  the  most  of  his  service  to  the  poor. 
He  naturally  is  interested  to  show  that  the  gospel  news  he 
has  to  record  is  of  immediate  concern  to  the  most  needy 
classes,  and  among  these  to  the  humble  and  the  poor.  He 
says  so  much  about  these  that  this  third  Gospel  has  been 


238     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

called  the  Gospel  of  the  Ebionites,  the  Ebionites  deriving 
their  name  from  the  Hebrew  word  Ebion,  "poor."  Let  us 
notice  a  few  of  the  facts  which  lead  to  such  a  conclusion. 

(i)  The  angel  Gabriel  is  sent  to  make  the  annunciation 
of  the  Messiah's  birth,  not  to  any  royal  palace,  not  to  any 
mansion  of  the  rich,  but  to  a  plainly  furnished  and  pov- 
erty-stricken peasant's  home.  There  to  a  humble  maiden  of 
the  multitude  of  the  poor  in  the  land  was  his  message  given 
that  the  Messias  would  come.  Luke  alone  has  recorded  that 
scene.^*® 

(2)  Mary  went  to  see  her  kinswoman,  Elisabeth,  and 
there  she  sang  her  Magnificat : 

"He  hath  put  down  princes  from  their  thrones, 
And  hath  exalted  them  of  low  degree. 
The  hungry  he  hath  filled  with  good  things ; 
And  the  rich  he  hath  sent  empty  away."  ^** 

Luke  alone  has  recorded  the  song. 

(3)  Luke  alone  tells  us  how  this  marvelous  birth  took 
place.  He  says  that  the  Saviour  was  born  in  a  stable.  He 
says  that  the  Messias  was  laid  in  a  manger.  He  says  that 
the  Incarnate  God  could  find  no  room  in  the  inn.^^*^  Was 
this  the  way  for  the  King  of  kings  and  the  Lord  of  lords  to 
enter  upon  his  inheritance? 

Jesus  is  born  in  the  extremest  poverty  of  surroundings. 
It  has  been  said  that  the  shortest  biography  of  Jesus  ever 
written  was  that  in  which  the  apostle  Paul  expressed  the 
bald  fact  and  the  whole  astonishing  truth  of  the  incarnation 
in  one  word,  hrToix^vaev,  He  became  poor.^^*  It  is  Luke 
who  has  given  us  the  historical  setting  for  this  assertion  in 
his  story  of  the  Saviour's  birth. 

(4)  In  Matthew's  story  the  Magi  appear  in  Jerusalem 


•«  1. 26-38. 

'*"  1. 52, 53. 

'''2. 7. 

"'2  Cor.  8. 

9. 

THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  239 

and  make  inquiry  of  the  king  in  his  palace  and  of  the  scribes 
who  were  the  masters  of  the  law.  The  news  is  thus  given 
in  the  capital  and  to  the  chief  rulers  of  the  nation.  In  Luke 
no  such  public  proclamation  takes  place.  The  only  people 
who  are  told  about  this  transcendent  mystery  of  the  incarna- 
tion are  some  shepherd  lads,  keeping  watch  by  night  over 
their  flocks  on  the  Bethlehem  hills.  Those  poor  fellows  had 
no  gifts  to  bring  to  Mary  or  to  Jesus,  but  they  heard  the 
good  news  of  great  joy  which  should  be  to  all  people  and 
they  spread  that  news  among  the  poor  people  everywhere.^'^^ 

(5)  According  to  Luke,  who  has  made  the  only  record  of 
them,  later  revelations  were  accorded  to  some  quiet  and  ob- 
scure people,  Simeon  and  Anna,^'^^  ^ot  to  Augustus  at  Rome, 
nor  to  Annas,  the  high  priest  at  Jerusalem. 

(6)  Luke  is  careful  to  tell  us  that  when  the  days  of  puri- 
fication were  ended,  and  the  parents  made  their  sacrifice  in 
the  temple,  they  offered  a  pair  of  turtledoves,  or  two  young 
pigeons,  the  sacrifice  of  the  very  poor.*^^ 

(7)  Luke  alone  tells  us  that  when  John  the  Baptist  came 
preaching  he  said  to  the  multitudes,  "He  that  hath  two  coats, 
let  him  impart  to  him  that  hath  none ;  and  he  that  hath  food, 
let  him  do  likewise."  ^^^  John  the  Baptist  believed  that  the 
sharing  of  superfluities  in  practical  philanthropy  would  solve 
the  problem  of  the  poor,  or,  at  least,  it  would  help  to  solve 
the  problem  of  the  equitable  distribution  of  wealth. 

(8)  When  Jesus  was  ready  to  begin  his  ministry  Luke 
records  his  first  sermon  in  the  synagogue  at  Nazareth,  and 
he  says  that  the  first  words  which  Jesus  uttered  were  these : 

"The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me. 

Because   he  anointed   me   to   preach   good   tidings   to   the 
poor."  i5« 


'2.  8-20. 
'2.  25-38. 
'2.  22-24. 

'3.  II. 
'4.  18. 


240     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

According  to  Luke,  the  gospel  of  Jesus  is  a  gospel  to  the 
poor.  That  text  from  Isaiah  was  the  fitting  motto  for  the 
beginning  and  the  middle  and  the  end  of  his  ministry.  It 
summarized  the  whole  of  his  mission  to  men. 

(9)  In  Luke  14.  33  we  find  Jesus  saying,  "Whosoever  he 
be  of  you  that  renounceth  not  all  that  he  hath,  he  cannot  be 
my  disciple";  and  Luke  alone  has  recorded  the  fact  that 
when  Jesus  called  Peter  and  Andrew  and  James  and  John 
and  Matthew  into  his  service  they  all  of  them  left  all  and 
followed  him.^5'^ 

(10)  Where  Matthew  has  written  the  Beatitude  of  our 
Lord,  "Blessed  are  the  poor  in  spirit,"  Luke  has  it,  "Blessed 
are  ye  poor";^^^  and  where  Matthew  has  written,  "Blessed 
are  they  that  hunger  and  thirst  after  righteousness,"  Luke 
has  it,  "Blessed  are  ye  that  hunger  now:  for  ye  shall  be 
filled."  1^9  Where  Matthew  has  only  Beatitudes,  Luke  adds 
some  "Woes" — "Woe  unto  you  that  are  rich !"  ^^^  and, 
"Woe  unto  you,  ye  that  are  full  now!  for  ye  shall 
hunger."  ^^^ 

(11)  Luke  records  the  parable  of  Dives  and  Lazarus,  in 
which  the  poor  beggar  has  the  advantage  at  last.^®^ 

(12)  Luke  has  the  parable  of  the  rich  fool,  who  labored 
long  and  gained  much  and  lost  everything  in  one  night,  in- 
cluding his  soul.^^2  Was  there  ever  such  a  vivid  picture  of 
utter  selfishness  put  into  so  brief  a  form?  Look  at  the 
possessive  pronouns,  "my  fruits,  my  barns,  my  grain,  my 
goods,  my  soul."  No  one  of  those  things  belonged  to  him, 
least  of  all  his  soul.  That  was  taken  away  from  him  in  one 
night,  and  then  to  whom  did  all  the  other  things  belong? 
Look  at  the  personal  pronouns,  "What  shall  /  do  ?  This  will 
/  do.  Then  /  will  say  to  my  soul."  There  are  seven  of 
these  future  tenses  in  the  Greek,  all  showing  how  happy  he 


■5.  11,28.  ^"6.  25. 

'6.  20.  "*i6.  19-31. 

'  6.  21.  *"  12.  16-21. 
'6.  24. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  241 

is  going  to  be  in  some  future  day.  They  are  followed  by  six 
present  tenses,  all  utterly  selfish,  but  all  postponed  to  that 
future  day  which  never  dawned.  "I  will  say,  Eat,  drink, 
rest,  rejoice";  but  he  never  lived  to  say  it,  much  less  really 
to  do  any  of  these  things. 

(13)  Luke  also  has  that  parable  about  the  chief  seats  at 
the  feast,  closing  with  the  promise,  "He  that  humbleth  him- 
self shall  be  exalted."  ^^'* 

( 14)  Luke  tells  us  of  that  great  supper  to  which  the  "poor 
and  maimed  and  blind  and  lame"  were  invited. ^^^  It  is  a 
symbol  of  the  gospel  feast  set  forth  in  all  these  pages  written 
by  Luke.  It  is  all  for  the  poor  and  for  the  poorest  of  the 
poor.  Luke  is  ready  to  go  out  into  the  highways  and  the 
hedges  and  constrain  these  impoverished  and  neglected  ones 
to  come  in.  By  way  of  contrast,  remember  what  Voltaire 
said  to  D'Alembert :  "We  have  never  pretended  to  enlighten 
the  cobblers  and  the  maid-servants.  We  leave  that  for  the 
apostles."  That  is  the  work  in  which  Paul  delighted.  That 
is  the  work  to  which  Luke  devoted  himself.  Jesus  was 
anointed  to  preach  the  gospel  to  the  poor.  The  gospel  of  his 
anointed  ones  will  be,  like  this  Gospel  according  to  Luke,  a 
gospel  of  comfort  and  encouragement  and  salvation  to  the 
poor. 

It  may  be  well  to  suggest,  before  leaving  this  subject,  that 
while  Luke  evidently  had  an  overflowing  sympathy  for  the 
poor,  his  book  does  not  lead  us  to  think  that  he  had  any 
prejudice  against  wealth  as  such,  any  more  than  Jesus  had. 
Riches  never  harmed  a  man  unless  he  tried  to  find  his  hap- 
piness in  them.  If  he  allowed  them  to  stand  between  him 
and  the  kingdom,  they  made  him  infinitely  poor.  That 
seemed  to  be  the  case  with  the  rich  young  ruler.  He  would 
not  follow  Jesus  if  he  must  forsake  his  wealth.  He  pre- 
ferred earthly  substance  to  his  soul's  salvation.    That  was  a 


14.  7-1 1. 
14.  21. 


242     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

fatal  choice.    He  trusted  to  his  riches  for  his  supreme  satis- 
faction and  he  went  away  sorrowful  rather  than  satisfied. 

It  was  not  because  he  was  rich  that  he  could  not  be  saved. 
It  was  because  he  trusted  in  riches  more  than  in  a  Redeemer. 
A  poor  man  can  do  that  as  well  as  a  rich  man.  A  poor  man 
can  feel  sure  that  if  he  had  riches  he  could  take  care  of 
himself,  and  if  he  trusts  in  riches  to  that  extent  the  wealth 
he  has  not  can  keep  him  out  of  the  kingdom.  Jesus  said, 
"Children,  how  hard  is  it  for  them  that  trust  in  riches  to 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God!"  That  warning  was  as 
applicable  to  those  poor  disciples  as  to  any  others.  They, 
too,  must  put  their  trust  in  God  rather  than  in  mammon,  in 
order  to  be  saved.  Wealth  never  saved  a  man,  and  wealth 
just  as  surely  never  damned  a  man.  It  is  the  use  of  wealth 
which  determines  its  relation  to  a  man's  character. 

( 1 )  In  the  parable  Abraham  is  in  bliss,  and  Abraham  pre- 
sumably was  just  as  rich  a  man  upon  earth  as  the  rich  man 
whom  the  parable  shows  us  in  torments.  The  difference 
between  Abraham  and  Dives  was  not  one  of  wealth,  but  one 
of  character. 

(2)  Luke  alone  tells  us  about  Zacchaeus,  and  we  learn  that 
Zacchaeus  was  a  very  wealthy  man ;  and  when  he  decides  to 
keep  half  of  his  possessions  there  is  no  hint  that  either  Jesus 
or  Luke  thought  that  he  ought  to  have  given  up  all. 

(3)  In  the  various  discussions  throughout  the  Gospel  con- 
cerning masters  and  servants  there  is  no  suggestion  that  it 
is  wrong  to  have  servants,  and  in  one  passage  the  Master 
plainly  says  that  he  who  sits  at  meat  is  superior  to  him  who 
serves,^®^  but  it  is  a  kind  of  superiority  which  he  himself 
does  not  desire. 

(4)  Possibly  Luke  is  more  insistent  than  either  Matthew 
or  Mark  upon  the  fact  that  Joseph  of  Arimathaea,  while  a 
rich  man,  was  also  a  good  and  righteous  man,  and  one  who 
was  looking  for  the  kingdom  of  God.^®'^ 

"•22.  27. 
'''23.  50,  SI. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  243 

These  indications  are  sufficient  to  show  that  wealth  turned 
to  good  uses  was  appreciated  to  the  full  by  Luke  and  by  his 
Lord.  They  were  both  of  them  glad  enough  that  there  were 
some  women  who  were  well-to-do  and  able  to  minister  of 
their  substance  to  the  Master  and  his  apostles  in  the  days  of 
their  need.  They  preferred  to  preach  and  be  poor  them- 
selves, but  they  had  no  prejudice  against  those  who  made 
money  honestly  if  they  made  good  use  of  their  money  when 
made.  They  loved  the  poor  and  served  the  poor,  but  they 
had  no  objection  to  being  served  by  the  rich  if  the  rich 
offered  to  share  any  portion  of  their  possessions  with  them. 
They  were  preachers  of  the  gospel  to  the  poor,  a  gospel 
whose  message  was  of  equal  importance  and  value  to  the 
rich  and  to  which  the  rich  were  equally  welcome  if  they 
would  hear, 

7.  This  is  The  Gospel  for  the  Outcasts. 

There  is  still  another  class  with  which  the  physician  must 
perforce  come  into  professional  contact,  and  with  which  the 
preacher  and  the  lawyer  often  have  little  to  do.  That  is  the 
class  of  the  social  outcasts.  It  surely  is  characteristic  of 
this  Gospel  according  to  Luke  that  its  sympathy  reaches 
even  to  these.  Luke  6.  35,  in  the  margin  of  the  Revised 
Version,  reads,  Jesus  despaired  "of  no  man."  That  might 
be  made  the  text  of  the  entire  narrative.  Luke  was  like  his 
Master  again  at  this  point.  The  brand  of  public  infamy  has 
no  weight  for  him.  His  sympathies  went  out  to  all  who 
were  in  need,  even  as  the  sympathies  of  Jesus  always  had 
been  manifested  most  to  those  who  needed  them  most. 

In  the  Acts  of  Paul  and  Thecla  we  read  that  Paul  said 
of  Jesus  that  he  was  the  only  one  who  sympathized  with  a 
world  gone  astray.  In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  we  read 
that  Jesus  is  our  great  High  Priest,  being  able  to  sympathize 
with  the  ignorant  and  the  erring.  It  is  this  compassionate 
Christ  whom  Luke  sets  before  us  in  his  pages.  He  is  not 
seeking  the  self-satisfied,  but  the  self-despairing.  It  was  the 
sickest  who  had  greatest  need.    It  was  those  whom  all  others 


244     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

had  deserted  who  most  needed  a  friend.  Jesus  in  this 
Gospel  is  the  Good  Shepherd  seeking  for  the  outcast  in  the 
farthest  mountains  of  social  ostracism  or  willful  sin.  Jesus 
was  a  Jew.  He  had  had  a  Jewish  training.  He  lived  al- 
ways in  a  Jewish  environment.  He  never  had  the  advantage 
of  foreign  travel  and  he  never  came  under  the  broadening 
influence  of  residence  among  the  many  races  of  men.  Yet 
he  never  displays  any  Jewish  narrowness  or  prejudice.  He 
is  interested  in  all  men  alike.  No  man,  of  whatever  nation- 
ality or  of  whatever  previous  spiritual  condition,  is  beyond 
his  sympathy  or  the  ready  proflFer  of  his  help. 

(i)  This  is  the  Gospel  in  which  we  read  of  the  prodigal 
son  who  wastes  all  his  Hving  on  harlots  and  yet  is  not  beyond 
reclamation,  and  who  comes  back  at  last  to  the  father's  home 
and  to  the  unhesitating  and  undiminished  love  of  the 
father's  heart.^^^ 

(2)  This  is  the  Gospel  of  the  publican  Zacchaeus,  generally 
regarded  as  a  sinner  with  whom  no  respectable  people  ought 
to  have  any  social  dealings,  but  with  whom  Jesus  went  to 
lodge,  and  whom  Jesus  acknowledged  as  a  son  of  Abra- 
ham, i^a 

(3)  This  is  the  Gospel  of  the  sinful  woman  with  whom 
Simon  the  Pharisee  would  have  been  ashamed  to  show  any 
personal  acquaintance  in  public,  but  whom  Jesus  recog- 
nized and  whose  service  he  gladly  accepted  and  whose  sins 
he  freely  forgave.^'^ 

(4)  This  is  the  Gospel  in  which  the  crucified  criminal,  a 
coarse  bandit  who  was  given  up  by  the  state  as  a  hopeless 
case,  and  was  paying  the  penalty  of  his  many  crimes,  walked 
straight  into  paradise  with  the  sinless  Lord.^^^ 

In  this  Gospel  the  harlot  and  the  criminal,  the  prodigal 
and  the  social  pariah,  of  whatever  class  or  condition,  are 

"'15.  11-32. 
'"  19.  2-10. 
''"7.  36-50. 
^''23.  40-43. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  245 

freely  offered  the  society  and  the  service  of  the  purest  and 
the  best.  Do  the  preachers  of  to-day  associate  with  these 
classes?  Are  they  on  terms  of  familiar  acquaintance  with 
them?  Are  they  continually  finding  converts  among  them? 
Are  they  continually  proving  that  they  who  are  forgiven 
most  love  most,  and  that  from  these  classes  the  most  devoted 
saints  may  come?  If  they  are  not,  their  gospel  must  be 
somewhat  different  from  the  gospel  of  Luke  and  his  Lord ; 
or,  if  they  have  the  same  gospel,  their  ministration  of  it 
must  be  somewhat  different. 

Does  not  this  Gospel  according  to  Luke  suggest  that  every 
Christian  preacher  to-day  ought  to  know  every  exploiter  of 
vice  in  his  neighborhood  and  every  inmate  of  every  house  of 
ill  fame,  and  that  a  part  of  his  ministry  ought  to  be  given 
to  these,  and  that  some  of  the  chief  triumphs  of  his  ministry 
ought  to  be  found  among  these?  Surely,  conditions  have 
not  so  changed  that  we  need  to  despair  of  any  man  or  of 
any  woman  now,  or  that  we  ought  to  recognize  any  social 
outcasts  now,  to  whom  it  is  not  our  duty  to  carry  the  good 
news  of  salvation. 

The  Gospel  according  to  Luke  is  the  gospel  of  the  chil- 
dren, the  gospel  of  womanhood,  the  gospel  of  the  poor,  and 
the  gospel  of  the  outcast  and  forsaken.  Of  course,  the  other 
synoptics  have  some  suggestions  of  these  things,  but  they  are 
so  numerous  in  the  third  Gospel  and  they  are  so  frequently 
found  in  the  portions  peculiar  to  it  that  they  become  char- 
acteristic of  the  narrative  written  by  Luke.  They  might  be 
accounted  for  altogether  by  his  knowledge  of  and  his  sym- 
pathy with  the  character  of  Jesus,  who  was  the  friend  of  the 
little  ones  and  the  women  and  the  poor  and  the  publicans 
and  sinners  in  all  his  ministry.  They  might  be  accounted 
for  altogether  by  Luke's  personal  character  and  by  his  over- 
flowing sympathy  for  all  the  helpless  and  oppressed.  We 
have  endeavored  to  show  that  in  addition  to  these  things 
his  profession  as  a  physician  must  have  influenced  him 
largely  in  his  choice  of  materials  for  his  gospel  history. 


246     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

The  sign-manual  of  the  physician  is  written  large  over  the 
pages  of  his  narrative  and  is  apparent  also  in  his  peculiar 
and  characteristic  interest  in  certain  classes — the  women 
and  children,  the  outcast  and  the  poor.  We  might  continue 
our  classification  of  the  general  characteristics  of  the  Gos- 
pel according  to  Luke  under  this  general  head,  but  we  pre- 
fer to  turn  now  from  Luke  the  physician  to  Luke  the  com- 
panion of  Paul. 

8.  This  is  The  Pauline  Gospel. 

Much  more  nearly  than  the  other  two  synoptics,  the  Gos- 
pel according  to  Luke  is  the  Gospel  according  to  Paul.  It  is 
but  natural  that  the  Gentile  Gospel  should  reflect  most 
largely  the  theology  of  the  apostle  to  the  Gentiles.  Luke's 
close  personal  association  with  the  apostle  Paul  must  have 
influenced  him  greatly  in  his  conceptions  of  the  scope,  the 
content,  and  the  aim  of  the  gospel  message  and  truth.  Paul 
was  more  nearly  a  systematic  theologian  than  any  other  of 
the  New  Testament  writers.  Luke  has  managed  to  get 
much  more  doctrine  into  his  Gospel  narrative  than  the  other 
synoptics ;  and  the  doctrine  of  Luke  is  substantially  the  doc- 
trine of  Paul. 

Three  times  in  his  epistles  Paul  speaks  of  "my  gospel."  ^"^^ 
Origen,  Eusebius,^'''^  and  Jerome^'^^  thought  that  Paul  meant 
by  this  phrase  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke.  That  was 
his  gospel  because  it  represented  his  point  of  view  through- 
out. Irenseus^'^^  had  written  still  earlier,  "Luke,  the  com- 
panion of  Paul,  committed  to  writing  the  gospel  preached 
by  the  latter."    There  is  so  much  in  common  between  the 


'"Rom.  2.  i6;  Rom.  i6.  25;  2  Tim.  2.  8. 

ITS  '"phey  say  that  Paul  meant  to  refer  to  Luke's  Gospel  whenever, 
as  if  speaking  of  some  Gospel  of  his  own,  he  used  the  words  'ac- 
cording to  my  Gospel.'  "    Hist.  Eccles.  iii,  4. 

"*  "Some  suppose  that  whenever  Paul  in  his  Epistles  makes  use 
of  the  expression  'according  to  my  Gospel'  he  means  Luke's  writing." 
De  vir.  illustr.,  vii. 

'"Adversus  Haereses,  iii,  i.  i. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  247 

Gospel  written  by  Luke  and  the  gospel  preached  by  Paul 
that  we  readily  can  believe  that  Paul's  influence  is  mani- 
fest in  Luke's  writing,  but  we  do  not  believe  that  Paul  ever 
called  the  third  Gospel  his  own  in  the  sense  that  he  claimed 
any  personal  responsibility  for  its  composition.  When  he 
spoke  of  "my  gospel"  he  meant  only  the  revelation  made  to 
himself  and  proclaimed  in  his  preaching.  We  have  no 
reason  to  believe  that  the  word  "gospel"  was  used  as  a 
proper  name  in  any  of  the  New  Testament  writings  or  was 
applied  at  any  time  to  any  of  the  books  we  now  call  by  such 
title. 

The  truth  behind  this  tradition  of  Paul's  personal  appro- 
priation of  the  third  Gospel  is,  as  Plummer  says,  the  fact 
that  "Paul  was  the  illuminator  of  Luke  (Tert.  iv,  2) :  he  en- 
lightened him  as  to  the  essential  character  of  the  gospel. 
.Luke,  as  his  fellow  worker,  would  teach  what  the  apostle 
taught,  and  would  learn  to  give  prominence  to  those  ele- 
ments in  the  gospel  narrative  of  which  he  made  most  fre- 
quent use."  The  old  Latin  proverb  said,  Noscitur  a  sociis, 
"A  man  is  known  by  the  company  he  keeps."  No  one  could 
be  a  close  companion  with  the  apostle  Paul  without  being 
influenced  by  him  in  both  life  and  thought.  We  have  seen 
that  Luke  was  not  only  a  companion,  but  a  beloved  physi- 
cian and  a  congenial  friend.  Coleridge  used  to  say  that  no 
one  was  fitHio  be  a  commentator  upon  the  Epistles  of  Paul 
except  Martin  Luther,  and  Luther  failed  because  he  was  not 
such  a  gentleman  as  Paul.  Now,  Luke  was  a  gentleman. 
He  had  something  of  the  innate  courtesy  which  characterized 
the  great  apostle,  and  in  this  Gospel  we  find  the  general 
impress  made  by  the  character  and  the  creed  of  the  apostle 
upon  such  a  man. 

Having  thus  determined  the  nature  of  Luke's  indebted- 
ness to  Paul,  we  will  now  look  for  the  more  specific  proofs 
of  such  relationship  in  the  writings  of  these  two  men. 

I.  We  notice  some  remarkable  parallelisms  of  expression 
at  several  points,    a.  In  the  account  of  the  Lord's  Supper 


248     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

neither  Matthew  nor  Mark  tells  us  that  the  Lord  said,  "Do 
this  in  remembrance  of  me."  Luke,  in  22.  19,  and  Paul,  in 
I  Cor.  II.  24,  are  the  only  ones  to  record  it.  Matthew  and 
Mark  say  that  the  Lord  said,  "This  is  my  blood  of  the  cove- 
nant," while  Paul  and  Luke  record  the  words  as,  "This  cup 
is  the  new  covenant  in  my  blood."  ^'^^  Matthew  and  Mark 
connect  the  Eucharist,  or  thanksgiving,  with  the  cup;  Paul 
and  Luke  connect  it  with  the  bread.  These  striking  differ- 
ences from  other  accounts  and  close  similarities  between 
Paul  and  Luke  would  be  sufficient  in  themselves  to  suggest 
that  these  two  men  had  been  associated  many  a  time  in  the 
administration  of  this  sacrament,  and  so  had  come  to  adopt 
the  same  formulation  in  the  account  of  it. 

b.  In  I  Cor.  15.  5  Paul  tells  us  that  the  risen  Lord  ap- 
peared to  Cephas.  The  only  other  mention  of  this  resur- 
rection appearance  in  the  New  Testament  is  to  be  found  in 
Luke  24.  34 :  "The  Lord  is  risen  indeed,  and  hath  appeared 
to  Simon."  Paul  and  Luke  seem  to  have  regarded  this  as 
one  of  the  important  appearances,  or  at  least  worthy  of 
mention  in  any  account  of  them.  All  our  other  authorities 
are  utterly  silent  concerning  it. 

c.  Some  have  thought  that  a  threefold  classification  of 
ideas  is  characteristic  of  both  Paul  and  Luke.  We  recall 
such  passages  in  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  as  i  Cor.  13.  13,  "Now 
abideth  faith,  hope,  love,  these  three,"  and  that  other  enu- 
meration of  the  essential  elements  in  the  unity  of  the  Spirit 
set  forth  in  Eph.  4.  4-6,  falling  into  three  groups  of  three : 
one  body,  one  Spirit,  one  hope;  one  Lord,  one  faith,  one 
baptism;  one  God  and  Father  of  all,  transcendent,  omni- 
present, immanent,  over  all,  through  all,  in  all.  When  we 
turn  to  Luke  we  find  him  recording  the  three  parables  of  the 
lost  sheep,  the  lost  coin,  and  the  lost  son  together,  while 
Matthew  has  the  parable  of  the  lost  sheep  alone.^'^'^  Luke 
tells  us  of  three  would-be  disciples  who  are  turned  away  by 

'"Luke  22.  20;  I  Cor.  11.  25. 
"'18.  12. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  249 

our  Lord,  and  in  the  parallel  passage  in  Matthew^'^®  we  find 
mention  of  only  two.  Compare  also  the  loaf,  fish,  and  egg 
of  Luke  II.  II,  12  with  the  bread  and  fish  of  Matt.  7.  9,  10. 

d.  There  are  many  phrases  common  to  Paul  and  Luke 
and  not  to  be  met  anywhere  else  in  the  New  Testament. 
Long  lists  of  these  have  been  prepared  by  many  authorities. 
We  suggest  a  few  samples  only  among  them.  Compare 
Luke  4.  22  with  Col.  4.  6,  and  Luke  8.  15  with  Col.  i.  10,  11, 
and  Luke  6.  39  with  Rom.  2.  19,  and  Luke  10.  8  with  i  Cor. 
10.  27,  and  Luke  21.  36  with  Eph.  6.  18. 

(2)  To  these  parallelisms  in  expression  we  add,  in  the 
second  place,  a  remarkable  similarity  in  the  use  of  single 
terms.    For  example : 

a.  The  double  title  "Lord  Jesus"  is  found  nearly  a  hun- 
dred times  in  the  Epistles  of  Paul.  It  is  found  only  once  in 
the  synoptic  Gospels — in  Luke  24.  3. 

b.  The  name  "Lord"  is  applied  to  Jesus  again  and  again 
by  Paul.  It  is  never  so  used  in  the  Gospel  according  to 
Mark  except  by  the  heathen  Syrophoenician  woman  in  7.  28. 
The  title  occurs  fourteen  times  in  Luke,  and  so  makes  an- 
other connecting  link  between  his  usage  and  that  of  Paul. 

c.  The  proper  name  "Satan"  is  used  by  Paul  ten  times,  by 
Luke  seven  times,  by  Mark  six  times,  by  Matthew  four 
times,  and  by  John  only  once. 

d.  The  word  "Saviour"  is  not  found  in  Matthew  or  Mark. 
It  occurs  twice  in  Luke,  once  in  John,  and  a  multitude  of 
times  in  Paul. 

e.  The  word  "salvation"  is  not  found  in  Matthew  or  Mark. 
It  occurs  four  times  in  Luke,  once  in  John,  on  page  after 
page  in  the  writings  of  Paul. 

/.  The  word  "grace"  is  characteristic  of  Paul's  most  fre- 
quent and  emphatic  usage.  It  never  is  found  in  Matthew 
and  Mark.  It  occurs  eight  times  in  Luke  and  three  times 
in  John.    It  is  found  one  hundred  and  forty-six  times  in  the 

'"8.  19-22. 


250     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

New  Testament,  but  only  twenty-one  times  outside  the  writ- 
ings of  Luke  and  Paul. 

g.  "Faith"  is  another  keyword  in  Paul's  theology.  It  is 
found  in  Luke  eleven  times,  in  Matthew  eight,  in  Mark  five, 
and  in  John  not  at  all.  In  the  book  of  Acts  the  word  occurs 
sixteen  times.  It  is  found  in  the  New  Testament  two  hun- 
dred and  forty-three  times,  but  only  fifty-three  times  outside 
the  writings  of  Luke  and  Paul. 

h.  Repentance  is  joined  with  faith  in  the  usage  of  Paul 
as  one  of  the  essentials  to  salvation.  The  word  "repent- 
ance," fierdvoia,  is  found  in  Luke  five  times,  in  Matthew 
two,  in  Mark  only  once,  and  in  John  not  at  all.  It  occurs  in 
the  book  of  Acts  six  times. 

i.  Paul  joins  mercy  with  grace  and  peace  in  some  of  his 
salutations.  The  word  "mercy,"  eAeof,  is  found  in  Luke  six 
times,  in  Matthew  three,  and  in  Mark  and  John  and  the  book 
of  Acts  not  at  all.  To  Luke  all  the  perfection  of  God  would 
seem  to  be  summed  up  in  his  quality  of  mercy.  In  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  as  reported  by  Matthew,  the  climax 
of  command  is  found  in  the  words,  "Be  ye  therefore  perfect, 
even  as  your  Father  in  heaven  is  perfect,"  ^^^  but  Luke 
chronicles  the  corresponding  command  in  his  Sermon  on  the 
Plain  in  these  words,  "Be  ye  therefore  merciful,  as  your 
Father  is  also  merciful."  ^^^  He  who  attains  this  height 
will  find  nothing  beyond  him. 

We  may  say,  in  general,  that  Luke's  vocabulary  is  much 
more  Pauline  than  that  of  the  other  gospel  writers.  Luke 
has  one  hundred  and  one  words  in  common  with  Paul  which 
are  not  to  be  found  in  any  other  writers  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment books.  Matthew  has  only  thirty-two  and  Mark 
twenty-two  and  John  twenty-one. 

(3)  However,  it  is  when  we  come  to  the  doctrinal  fea- 
tures they  have  in  common  that  the  relationship  between  the 
writings  of  Luke  and  Paul  becomes  most  apparent. 

"•  Matt  S-  48. 
"•6.36. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  251 

a.  The  third  Gospel  furnishes  the  historical  background 
for  just  such  teaching  and  preaching  as  that  of  the  great 
apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  Paul.  In  its  narrative  Israel  is  re- 
jected and  the  way  is  opened  for  the  reception  of  the  Gen- 
tiles into  the  kingdom  of  God  just  as  clearly  as  in  the  ninth, 
tenth,  and  eleventh  chapters  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
(a)  In  the  first  sermon  in  the  ministry  of  Jesus  he  made 
it  apparent  to  his  fellow  townsmen  in  Nazareth  that  the 
heathen  might  enjoy  the  blessings  they  were  ready  to 
despise.^^^  (b)  In  the  middle  of  his  ministry  Jesus  answers 
the  question,  "Are  there  few  that  be  saved?"  by  declaring, 
"They  shall  come  from  the  east  and  west,  and  from  the 
north  and  south,  and  shall  sit  down  in  the  kingdom  of  God ; 
but  ye  yourselves  shall  be  cast  forth  without."  ^^^  (q)  At 
the  close  of  his  ministry  Jesus  told  his  disciples  that  it  was 
written  that  repentance  and  remission  of  sins  should  be 
preached  in  his  name  unto  all  the  nations. '^^  From  the 
beginning  to  the  end  the  Gentiles  arc  included  within  the 
scope  of  the  gospel  salvation. 

b.  In  thorough  consistency  with  this  fundamental  position 
we  find  a  spirit  of  wide-reaching  and  all-inclusive  tolerance 
characterizing  this  Gospel  even  as  it  did  the  preaching  of 
Paul.  See  how  this  is  apparent  in  the  attitude  of  Jesus  as 
pictured  here  toward  the  Samaritans.  The  Jews  had  no 
dealings  with  the  Samaritans.  They  considered  them  even 
worse  than  Gentile  dogs,  (a)  When  the  Samaritan  vil- 
lagers showed  themselves  inhospitable  James  and  John 
were  ready  to  call  down  fire  from  heaven  upon  them,  in  the 
spirit  of  Elijah.  But  Jesus  declared  that  the  intolerant 
spirit  of  Elijah  was  not  the  spirit  of  the  gospel  he  had  come 
to  preach.  That  gospel  would  include  and  in  due  time  would 
win  the  Samaritans  as  well  as  the  Jews.^^*      (b)    Again, 


"•4. 

24-27. 

•"13. 

23-29. 

-24. 

■  47. 

-9. 

52-55. 

252     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

when  ten  lepers  were  healed  and  only  one  returned  to  give 
thanks  unto  God,  both  Jesus  and  the  evangelist  call  atten- 
tion to  the  fact  that  the  one  grateful  man  was  a  Samaritan 
stranger.185  (c)  Again,  in  the  Master's  parable  of  the  one 
who  proved  himself  neighbor  to  the  man  who  fell  among 
thieves  he  chose  as  the  hero  of  that  tale  no  Jewish  priest  or 
Levite,  but  a  good  Samaritan.^^^  It  is  in  the  third  Gospel 
alone  that  we  find  these  three  references  to  the  Samaritans, 
and  they  all  breathe  the  spirit  of  tolerance  and  friendliness 
which  was  to  characterize  a  gospel  preached  to  and  for  all 
men. 

c.  The  emphatic  and  persistent  presentation  of  the  per- 
sonality of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  characteristic  of  both  Luke  and 
Paul.  Where  Matthew  reads,  "If  ye  then,  being  evil,  know 
how  to  give  good  gifts  unto  your  children,  how  much 
more  shall  your  Father  who  is  in  heaven  give  good  things 
to  them  that  ask  him?"  i^'^,  Luke  sums  up  all  good  things 
in  that  one  greatest  gift  of  the  Father  to  men  and  says, 
"How  much  more  shall  your  heavenly  Father  give  the 
H!oly  Spirit  to  them  that  ask  him?"  i^s  jn  the  third  Gos- 
pel we  find  eighteen  references  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  thir- 
teen of  them  in  four  chapters;  and  in  the  whole  of  Mat- 
thew there  are  only  twelve,  and  in  Mark  only  six.  Luke 
therefore  has  as  many  as  Matthew  and  Mark  combined. 

If  we  were  to  name  the  three  features  in  which  the  doc- 
trinal teaching  of  Luke  and  Paul  are  most  alike,  we  would 
mention:  (i)  The  universal  scope  of  the  gospel,  because  of 
the  marvelous  grace  and  all-inclusive  love  shown  by  God 
to  men.  (2)  The  importance  of  the  work  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  (3)  The  emphasis  laid  upon  the  real  humanity  of 
Jesus.  We  turn  next  to  consider  this  characteristic  of  the 
Gospel  according  to  Luke. 


"°  17.  11-19. 
*"  10.  30-37. 
"'Matt.  7.  II- 
'""Luke  II.  13. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  253 

It  is  the  Gospel  of  the  real  humanity  of  Jesus.  It  is  the 
Gospel  of  Jesus  as  our  Brother-Man.  It  is  the  Gospel  of 
the  Kinsman-Redeemer  of  the  race.  Here  for  the  first 
time  in  the  New  Testament  we  meet  the  word  "redemp- 
tion"— "He  hath  visited  and  wrought  redemption  for  his 
people,"  Zacharias  sings.^^^  We  are  told  that  Anna  spoke 
of  Jesus  to  all  them  that  looked  for  redemption  in  Jeru- 
salem, i^*'  The  two  disheartened  disciples  on  their  way  to 
Emmaus  said,  "We  trusted  that  it  had  been  he  which  should 
have  redeemed  Israel."  ^^^  Redemption  by  a  genuine  in- 
carnation— that  is  the  great  theme  of  this  Gospel. 

9.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Jesus,  our  Brother-Man. 

( I )  /n  early  life.  It  begins  by  showing  that  the  birth  and 
infancy  and  childhood  of  Jesus  were  those  of  any  normal 
human  life.  a.  Luke  alone  tells  us  about  the  poverty  of  the 
surroundings  into  which  the  baby  boy  came,  born  of  a  wo- 
man, bone  of  our  bone,  and  flesh  of  our  flesh,  wrapped  in 
the  swaddling  clothes  and  laid  in  the  stable  straw. ^^^ 

b.  Luke  tells  us  that  he  was  circumcised  like  every  other 
Jewish  boy.^^2  It  was  the  first  shedding  of  redeeming 
blood.  It  was  his  first  external  identification  with  the  reU- 
gious  Ufe  of  his  race. 

c.  Luke  also  tells  us  about  his  presentation  in  the  temple.^^^ 
Born  under  the  law,  it  became  him  to  fulfill  all  righteous- 
ness. 

d.  Luke  records  the  fact  that  the  child  Jesus  grew  as 
every  other  child  grew,  increasing  in  size  and  increasing  in 
strength,  and  correspondingly  increasing  in  wisdom  as  the 
days  and  the  years  went  by.^^^  The  boy  Jesus  is  neither 
omniscient  nor  omnipotent,  but  just  a  normal,  natural, 
healthy,  and  growing  boy,  according  to  Luke. 

e.  Luke  tells  us  how  Jesus  went  up  to  Jerusalem  to  cele- 


,B.j 

68. 

.«.2. 

38. 

'"24 

..  21, 

x«2. 

4-7. 

IM 


IM 


2.  21. 
2.    22. 

'2.  40. 


254     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

brate  his  first  passover  as  a  son  of  the  Law,  and  how  he  sat 
in  the  temple  in  the  midst  of  the  teachers,  both  hearing 
them,  and  asking  them  questions. ^^^ 

/.  Luke  adds  that  through  all  his  minority  in  the  home 
at  Nazareth  Jesus  was  subject  to  his  parents,  as  any  lad 
would  be  expected  to  be.^®'^ 

g.  Then,  lest  anyone  should  think  that  the  youth  of  Jesus 
was  not  like  his  childhood  or  like  the  youth  of  any  other  lad 
in  its  gradual  development  of  all  its  powers,  Luke  tells  us 
again  that  Jesus  advanced  in  wisdom  and  stature,  and  in 
favor  with  God  and  men.^®^  It  is  Luke  alone  who  has 
given  us  this  information  concerning  the  babe  and  the  boy 
and  the  youth,  and  he  has  shown  us  that  Jesus  was  just  like 
us  in  his  human  birth  and  growth,  glorifying  babyhood  and 
obedient  childhood  by  entering  fully  into  their  estate. 

(2)  At  the  close  of  life.  When  we  turn  to  the  close  of 
the  narrative  we  find  that  Luke  is  very  careful  to  show  us 
how  Jesus  is  very  human  at  every  point,  a.  Luke  tells  us 
that  when  Jesus  wept  over  Jerusalem  he  wept  audibly,  sob- 
bing aloud  in  his  profound  grief,  genuinely  human  and 
pitiful.^^^  He  wept  at  the  grave  of  Lazarus,  but  there  he 
wept  silently.  John  has  recorded  that  weeping,2oo  but 
neither  John  nor  Luke  nor  any  other  evangelist  has  ever 
recorded  the  fact  that  Jesus  laughed.  He  was  a  "man  of 
sorrows,  and  acquainted  with  grief";  but  he  must  have  had 
some  moments  of  relaxation.  We  feel  sure  that  he  must 
have  smiled  many  and  many  a  time,  and  it  would  be  strange 
indeed  if  there  were  not  occasions  when  he  was  provoked 
into  hearty  laughter.  He  entered  so  thoroughly  into  sym- 
pathy with  the  joys  as  well  as  the  sorrows  of  those  who  were 
his  friends  that  he  must  have  laughed  with  them  sometimes. 
The  picture  of  normal  boyhood  which  Luke  presents  in  this 
Gospel  would  be  incomplete  if  we  were  not  allowed  to 

"°2.  42-46.  '"ip.  41-44. 

"'2.  51.  «»John  II.  35. 

"» 2.  52. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  255 

imagine  in  it  certain  moments  of  unrestrained  merriment 
in  the  enjoyment  of  innocent  fun.  We  think  that  he  would 
have  been  more  likely  to  pipe  and  dance  and  laugh  with  the 
other  children  of  Nazareth  in  their  games  in  the  market 
place  than  to  jofti  in  any  funeral  performances  or  mock- 
mourning.  His  youth  was  a  happy  one,  but  he  became  a 
Man  of  sorrows,  and  as  he  treads  the  thorny  path  to  the 
cross  with  suffering  and  tears  Luke  shows  us  that  he  was 
very  man  at  every  step. 

b.  Luke  records  that  an  angel  appeared  to  him  in  Geth- 
semane,  strengthening  him.201  Truly  man,  he  needed  heav- 
enly aid. 

c.  Luke  alone  tells  us  of  the  extremity  of  human  weak- 
ness and  physical  agony  through  which  Jesus  passed  in 
Gethsemane,  in  which  "his  sweat  became  as  it  were  great 
drops  of  blood  falling  down  upon  the  ground."  202 

d.  Luke  alone  tells  us  that  in  that  Gethsemane  arrest  Jesus 
called  himself  again  by  his  favorite  title  by  means  of  which 
he  so  continually  identified  himself  with  the  human  race 
and  proclaimed  his  brotherhood  with  all  other  men,  for  he 
said,  "Judas,  betrayest  thou  the  Son  of  man  with  a  kiss?"  ^os 

e.  Luke  has  the  record  that  in  utter  human  dependence 
upon  the  Father  in  the  hour  and  article  of  death  he  said, 
"Father,  into  thy  hands  I  commend  my  spirit."  204 

/.  Luke  alone  tells  us  that  the  centurion  who  stood  by  and 
saw  him  suffer  and  die  was  so  impressed  that  "he  glorified 
God,  saying,  Certainly  this  was  a  righteous  man."  205 

g.  Luke  tells  us  that  after  his  resurrection,  in  the  appear- 
ance to  the  assembled  disciples  on  that  first  Easter  evening, 
Jesus  sought  to  convince  them  that  his  incarnate  humanity 
had  survived  death  and  the  grave,  and  that  his  human 
identity  was  unimpaired.    He  said  to  them,  "See  my  hands 


22.  43.  **23.  46. 

'22.44,  ■*'23- 47. 

'22.  48. 


256     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

and  my  feet,  that  it  is  I  myself :  handle  me,  and  see ;  for  a 
spirit  hath  not  flesh  and  bones,  as  ye  behold  me  having." 
Then  he  took  a  piece  of  broiled  fish  "and  ate  before 
them."  206  As  at  the  beginning  of  his  hfe,  so  at  the  close 
of  his  life,  Luke  insists  upon  the  Lord's  real  humanity. 
There  is  no  human  weakness  or  limitation  in  which  Jesus 
does  not  share.  He  is  one  with  us  in  everything  but  sin; 
and  he  was  one  with  us  after  the  resurrection  and  in  the 
ascension  as  well. 

In  his  birth  and  early  life  Luke  has  shown  us  that  the 
Lord  was  really  and  truly  man.  Through  the  closing  days 
and  in  his  death  Luke  has  made  it  equally  clear  that  Jesus 
was  genuinely  human  to  the  last.  How  about  the  years  of 
his  active  ministry?  To  us  there  is  no  better  proof  of  the 
real  and  genuine  humanity  of  Jesus  than  his  prayers  afford 
us ;  and  no  one  of  the  evangelists  has  emphasized  the  Lord's 
need  and  practice  of  prayer  as  Luke  has.  Through  all  his 
ministry  he  shows  us  the  man  Jesus  continually  exercis- 
ing the  grace  of  true  spiritual  dependence.  Luke  repeatedly 
tells  us  that  Jesus  was  praying  when  the  other  evangehsts 
say  nothing  about  it. 

(3)  /«  the  life  of  prayer,  a.  We  read  in  the  other  Gos- 
pels about  the  baptism  of  Jesus  in  the  Jordan,  but  Luke 
alone  tells  us  that  it  was  as  Jesus  was  being  baptized  and 
praying  that  the  heaven  was  opened  for  the  descent  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  the  witness  of  the  heavenly  Voice.207 

b.  We  read  in  some  of  the  other  Gospels  about  the  cleans- 
ing of  the  leper  and  the  immediately  succeeding  collision 
with  the  religious  authorities.  Luke  alone  tells  us  that  be- 
tween these  two  events  Jesus  withdrew  himself  into  the 
deserts  and  prayed.^^^ 

c.  We  read  in  the  other  Gospels  of  the  choice  of  the 
twelve.     Luke  tells  us  that  that  choice  was  made  in  the 


aw 

24 

•  39-43. 

2«7 

3. 

21. 

a>8 

5- 

i6. 

THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  257 

early  morning,  after  Jesus  had  continued  in  prayer  all  night 
long  upon  the  mountain  alone.^'^® 

d.  Luke  tells  us  that  it  was  after  Jesus  had  been  praying 
apart  that  Peter  made  the  great  confession,  and  Jesus  an- 
swered it  with  his  first  prediction  of  his  own  future  suf- 
fering and  certain  murder.^^'* 

e.  Others  tell  us  about  the  transfiguration  experience,  but 
Luke  alone  informs  us  that  Jesus  had  gone  up  into  that 
mountain  to  pray,  and  that  as  he  was  praying  the  fashion 
of  his  countenance  was  altered,  and  he  was  transfigured  be- 
fore the  disciples'  eyes.^i^ 

/.  Matthew  records  the  prayer  prescribed  for  the  disciples, 
"Our  Father  who  art  in  heaven,  hallowed  be  thy  name,"  as 
a  part  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  Luke  alone  tells  us  that 
this  prayer  was  first  given  when  Jesus  had  been  praying  in 
a  certain  place,  and  when  he  ceased  one  of  his  disciples  had 
asked  him,  "Lord,  wilt  thou  teach  us  to  pray?"  212 

g.  Luke  tells  us  that  Jesus  said  to  Peter,  "Simon,  Simon, 
behold,  Satan  asked  to  have  you,  that  he  might  sift  you  as 
wheat :  but  1  made  supplication  for  thee,  that  thy  faith  fail 
not."  213 

h.  Luke  records  that  Jesus  prayed  on  the  cross,  "Father, 
forgive  them ;  for  they  know  not  what  they  do."^!* 

t.  Luke  adds  that  Jesus  made  his  last  breath  a  breath  of 
prayer.  He  cried  with  a  loud  voice,  "Father,  into  thy  hands 
I  commend  my  spirit :  and  having  said  this,  he  gave  up  the 
ghost."  215 

Jesus  needed  to  pray  just  as  much  as  we  need  to  pray. 
He  prayed  to  God  for  strength  because  he  needed  strength. 
He  prayed  to  God  for  guidance  because  he  needed  guidance. 
He  prayed  to  God  for  knowledge  because  he  needed  enlight- 
enment.   He  prayed  for  miracle-working  power,  and  it  was 

*"6.  12,  13.  "'22.  31,  32. 

"*9.  18-22.  "*23.  34. 

"'  9.  28,  29.  "'  23.  46. 
"11.  1-4. 


258     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

granted  him  in  answer  to  his  holy  prayer.  He  asked  for 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  by  his  aid  he  lived  a  holy  life.  He  is 
our  perfect  Pattern  in  prayer.  He  is  our  Prince  of  faith. 
Luke  has  emphasized  this  fact  as  no  other  New  Testament 
writer  has.  We  are  not  surprised,  therefore,  that  he  not 
only  has  given  us  the  example  of  Jesus  in  the  practice  of 
the  prayer  life,  but  he  also  has  preserved  for  us  some  addi- 
tional instruction  given  by  Jesus  concerning  prayer. 

a.  Luke  alone  tells  us  that  Jesus  spoke  a  parable  to  the 
end  that  men  ought  always  to  pray  and  not  to  faint.^^^ 

b.  He  tells  us  that  Jesus  in  that  parable  declared  that  the 
elect  of  God  cry  to  him  day  and  night.^i"^ 

c.  Luke  alone  gives  us  those  three  prayer  parables  of 
Jesus,  the  importunate  friendj^^^  tj^g  importunate  widowi^i^ 
and  the  pompously  praying  Pharisee  and  the  piously  pray- 
ing publican.220  They  all  teach  by  contrast.  You  do  not 
need  to  pray  like  the  importunate  friend,  for  you  pray  to  a 
Father  in  heaven  who  is  not  asleep  in  bed  and  who  is  more 
ready  to  give  than  you  are  to  ask.  You  do  not  need  to 
behave  like  that  importunate  widow,  for  you  do  not  pray 
to  an  unjust  judge,  but  to  a  loving  Father  who  will  avenge 
you  speedily.  You  must  not  pray  like  that  self -announcing 
Pharisee,  but  like  the  self-denouncing  and  self -renouncing 
publican. 

d.  Matthew  25.  13  and  Mark  13.  33  tell  us  that  the  Lord 
exhorted  the  disciples  to  "watch"  in  view  of  the  coming 
perils  and  trials  of  the  church;  but  Luke  adds  "at  every 
season,  making  supplication,  that  ye  may  prevail."  221 

e.  Luke  alone  tells  us  that  when  they  had  come  to  the 
garden  of  Gethsemane  Jesus  exhorted  the  disciple  band, 
"Pray  that  ye  enter  not  into  temptation."  222  Jt  was  only 
after  having  given  this  final  warning  and  command  that  he 

"*  18.  I.  *•  18.  9-14. 

*"' 18.  7.  •"21.36. 

"'11.  5-9.  "•22.40. 
"'  18.  1-8. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  259 

went  on  into  his  own  spiritual  wrestling  and  final  victory 
through  prayer. 

If  the  disciples  of  Jesus  had  learned  to  pray  as  their 
Master  prayed,  their  victory  would  have  been  as  sure  and 
as  continuous  as  his  own.  He  was  their  Master  in  the 
practice  and  the  precept  of  prayer,  as  in  everything 
else.  Luke  recognizes  him  as  such.  That  title  "Master," 
e-maTaTTjg,  is  peculiar  to  Luke  in  the  New  Testament.  He 
alone  records  the  fact  that  the  disciples  gave  this  name  to 
Jesus ;  and  in  the  third  Gospel  we  find  it  seven  times.223 

(4)  In  social  life.  It  is  characteristic  of  the  third  Gospel 
that  it  pictures  Jesus  as  entering  into  all  the  social  relations 
of  life.  Much  more  frequently  than  the  other  evangelists 
Luke  tells  us  how  Jesus  was  entertained  in  private  homes, 
was  invited  to  dinners,  and  sat  at  meat  with  various  hosts 
and  sometimes  with  many  guests;  and  much  of  the  teach- 
ing which  Matthew  represents  Jesus  as  giving  in  public  dis- 
courses we  find  Luke  recording  in  connection  with  these 
social  events. 

a.  Luke  tells  us  that  a  certain  Simon,  a  Pharisee,  invited 
Jesus  to  eat  with  him,  but  neglected  to  show  him  the  usual 
courtesies  offered  to  guests,  and  when  Jesus  was  anointed 
by  the  sinful  woman  Simon  was  told  the  parable  of  the  two 
debtors,  and  was  thus  gently  rebuked.^^* 

b.  Luke  tells  us  of  the  reception  in  the  house  of  Martha 
and  Mary,  and  of  Martha's  ministration  to  the  bodily  needs 
of  the  company  while  Mary  ministered  to  the  Master's 
wearied  soul. 225 

c.  Luke  tells  us  how  another  Pharisee  asked  Jesus  to  dine 
with  him,  and  while  they  were  sitting  at  the  table  Jesus 
uttered  that  scathing  rebuke  of  Pharisaical  hypocrisy  and 
sin. 226    Evidently  Jesus  did  not  consider  the  acceptance  of 

«5.  5;  8.  24;  8.  45;  9-  33;  9-  49;  17.  13. 
•"7.  36-50. 
»"  10.  38-42. 
""ii.  37-52. 


26o     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

any  man's  hospitality  a  sufficient  reason  for  blinking  any 
man's  sin. 

d.  Luke  alone  tells  us  that  on  a  certain  Sabbath  Jesus  was 
dining  in  the  house  of  one  of  the  rulers  of  the  Pharisees, 
and  it  was  there  that  the  cure  of  the  dropsical  man  took 
place.227  When  he  saw  those  who  were  bidden  choosing 
the  chief  seats  he  rebuked  their  selfishness.228  He  told  his 
host  that  he  ought  not  to  invite  such  people  to  dinner,  but 
he  would  be  blessed  if  he  would  invite  only  the  poor,  the 
maimed,  the  lame,  and  the  blind.^^a  Then  he  spoke  the 
parable  of  the  great  supper,  the  invitation  to  which  was 
slighted  by  the  guests  first  bidden,  and  to  which  the  peo- 
ple filling  the  highways  and  the  hedges  were  constrained 
to  come.230 

e.  By  Luke  only  we  are  told  of  the  joyful  hospitality  given 
to  Jesus  in  the  home  of  Zacchaeus  and  the  glad  issue  in  sal- 
vation to  that  house.231 

/.  By  Luke  alone  we  are  told  of  his  breaking  bread  in  the 
home  of  the  two  disciples  at  Emmaus,  and  of  their  recog- 
nition of  him  in  the  familiar  manner  of  his  doing  it.^^^ 
The  table  manners  of  Jesus  must  have  been  well  known  in 
many  a  humble  home  in  Palestine, 

In  all  the  instances  we  have  mentioned  Luke  alone  has 
preserved  the  picture  of  the  entertainment  of  Jesus  by  pri- 
vate persons  in  their  homes.  We  learn  from  these  narra- 
tives that  Jesus  did  not  refuse  an  invitation  to  dinner  upon 
the  Sabbath  day,  but,  on  the  contrary,  on  that  day  and  every 
day  he  seems  to  have  accepted  without  hesitation  the  prof- 
fered hospitality  of  rich  and  poor,  of  friends  and  foes.  We 
learn,  too,  that  he  was  just  as  faithful  to  his  ministry  on 
these  social  occasions  as  he  was  in  the  synagogues  or  at  any 
other  place.  People  had  their  sins  forgiven  while  he  sat  at 
dinner.     Salvation  came  to   the  home  in   which  he   was 

*"  14- 1-6.  '-''  14.  is-24. 

"*  14- 7-1 1-  ^'19.6-9. 

=^1412-14.  "^24.30,31. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  261 

entertained.  Some  of  his  most  stinging  rebukes  were  ad- 
ministered to  those  who  sat  at  meat  with  him.  Some  of  his 
most  precious  parables  and  teachings  were  first  given  on 
these  social  occasions. 

g.  In  the  parables  peculiar  to  the  third  Gospel  there  are 
many  glimpses  of  home  life,  showing  how  our  Lord  had 
been  observant  of  many  domestic  experiences.  The  master 
of  the  house  who  rises  up  and  shuts  to  the  door  and  makes 
all  safe  for  the  night,  the  neighbor  who  comes  knocking 
loudly  at  midnight  and  asking  to  borrow  a  few  loaves  of 
bread,  the  woman  raising  a  great  dust  and  upsetting  the 
whole  house  until  she  finds  the  lost  coin,  the  great  banquet 
with  music  and  dancing  to  celebrate  the  prodigal's  return — 
all  these  things  Luke  lets  us  know  that  the  Lord  had  seen 
and  had  made  note  of  for  use  in  his  preaching.  In  the 
parable  of  the  mustard  seed  Mark  says  that  the  seed  was 
sown  in  the  earth,233  and  Matthew  says  in  the  field,^^* 
but  Luke  says  that  a  man  sowed  it  in  his  own  garden.^^s 

10.  This  is  The  Gospel  of  Praise. 

We  close  this  list  of  the  characteristics  of  the  third  Gospel 
by  noting  some  of  the  things  which  recall  the  personality  of 
the  author  with  his  sunny  disposition  which  made  him  be- 
loved, and  caused  his  praise  to  be  sung  in  all  the  churches. 

( 1 )  The  narrative  begins  and  it  ends  with  worship  in  the 
temple.  The  first  picture  we  see  is  that  of  the  multitude  of 
the  people  praying  at  the  hour  of  incense,236  and  the  last 
picture  shown  us  is  that  of  the  band  of  disciples,  spending 
their  time  continually  in  the  temple  praising  God.^^? 

(2)  The  first  chapters  are  filled  with  hymns  of  praise. 
We  find  there  the  Magnificat,  the  song  of  Mary;238  the 
Benedictus,  the  song  of  Zacharias;^^^  the  Ave  Maria,  the 
angel's  salutation  ;24o  t^g  Gloria  in  Excelsis,  the  song  of  the 

"'24.  S3- 
"•1.46-55. 
"•  I.  68-79. 
•*•  I.  28-33. 


-4. 

31. 

-*I3 

.  31 

"•13. 

19. 

-l. 

10. 

262     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

angels  ;2*i  and  the  Nunc  Dimittis,  the  song  of  Simeon.242 
Schafif  says  of  these :  "They  are  the  last  of  Hebrew  psalms, 
as  well  as  the  first  of  Christian  hymns.  They  can  be  liter- 
ally translated  back  into  the  Hebrew  without  losing  their 
beauty."  243 

They  evidently  belong  to  just  this  border  line  between  the 
two  dispensations.  They  are  much  more  like  the  ancient 
psalms  than  the  later  Christian  hymns  are  wont  to  be. 
They  have  just  enough  of  the  dawning  light  of  the  new 
order  to  distinguish  them  from  the  songs  written  before  the 
Dayspring  from  on  high  had  visited  God's  people.  The 
Jewish  forms  and  figures  are  used  to  express  a  new  hope 
and  a  new  joy.  The  promise  made  to  Abraham  is  fulfilled. 
It  is  the  house  of  David  which  is  to  be  blessed.  It  is  the 
glory  of  the  house  of  Israel  which  is  revealed.  But  redemp- 
tion is  wrought;  salvation  has  come;  the  day  has  dawned; 
the  whole  heaven  is  lit  up  with  hope;  the  whole  heart  is 
filled  with  peace.  These  are  Christian  hymns,  but  there 
is  an  indefiniteness  about  them  which  marks  them  as  belong- 
ing to  the  very  beginning.  There  is  no  redemption  by  blood. 
There  is  no  forecasting  of  the  cross.  These  things  came  in 
later.  They  do  not  belong  here  in  the  first  joy  that  light  has 
shined  upon  those  who  sat  in  darkness  and  the  shadow  of 
death. 

This  Gospel  begins  with  songs  and  ends  with  songs,  and 
there  is  singing  and  rejoicing  all  the  way  along.  The  Gos- 
pel according  to  Matthew  began  with  the  wailing  at  Beth- 
lehem for  the  children  who  were  no  more  and  it  ended  with 
sevenfold  "Woes"  upon  the  Pharisees  who  would  not  be 
saved.  In  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke  the  saints  are  sing- 
ing from  the  beginning  to  the  close.  Bishop  Alexander  said 
of  the  Magnificat :  "It  is  the  highest  specimen  of  the  subtle 
influence  of  the  song  of  purity,  so  exquisitely  described  by 

'*'2.  14. 

^2.  29-32. 

"» SchafF.  op.  cit.,  p.  665. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  263 

Browning.  It  is  the  Pippa  Passes  among  the  Hturgies  of 
the  worl(i."2<4  What  he  has  said  of  Mary's  song  we  might 
well  say  of  the  entire  Gospel.  It  is  a  message  whose  melody 
has  transformed  the  hearts  of  men, 

(3)  More  often  than  in  any  other  Gospel  we  are  told  that 
those  who  received  special  benefits  glorified  God  for  them. 
Matthew  and  Mark  note  this  fact  occasionally,  but  Luke 
notes  it  again  and  again.^*^  Plummer  calls  our  attention 
further  to  the  fact  that  the  expression  "praising  God"  ^^e 
is  almost  peculiar  to  Luke  in  the  New  Testament.  The 
phrase  "blessing  God"  found  in  Luke  i.  64;  2.  28  occurs 
elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament  only  in  James  3.  9.  The 
phrase,  "to  give  praise  to  God,"  is  found  only  in  Luke  18.  43. 

(4)  In  the  two  books  of  Matthew  and  Mark  the  noun 
"joy"  occurs  seven  times,  while  in  Luke  and  Acts  it  is  found 
thirteen  times.  In  Matthew  and  Mark  the  verb  "to  rejoice" 
occurs  eight  times,  while  in  Luke  and  Acts  it  is  found 
nineteen  times.  Do  not  these  facts  suggest  that  Luke  was 
about  twice  as  joyful  as  the  ordinary  man,  and  that  he  was 
praising  God  and  glorifying  God  so  continually  that  it 
seemed  to  him  to  be  the  natural  thing  to  do? 

(5)  The  ministry  of  angels  to  Jesus  and  to  the  disciples 
is  emphasized  more  frequently  in  the  third  Gospel  than  in 
any  of  the  others;  and  angels  are  mentioned  twenty-two 
times  in  the  book  of  Acts.  The  angel  Gabriel  stands  at  the 
entrance  to  this  Gospel,  as  the  messenger  of  God  to  both 
Zacharias  and  Mary,  foretelling  the  birth  of  both  John  the 
Forerunner  and  Jesus  the  Messiah,  An  angel  appears  to  the 
shepherds  with  the  good  news  of  the  Saviour's  birth  and 
then  a  whole  choir  of  the  heavenly  host  sings  for  great  joy. 
At  the  time  of  the  great  confession  Jesus  promised  that  the 
Son  of  man  would  come  "in  his  own  glory,  and  the  glory  of 


'Alexander,  The  Leading  Ideas  of  the  Gospels,  p,  114. 

'2,  20;  5.  25,  2(>;  7.  16;  13.  13;  17.  15;  18.  43. 

'2.  13;  2.  20;  19.  ZT\  24.  53;  and  Acts  2.  47;  3.  8;  3.  9. 


264     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

the  Father,  and  of  the  holy  angels."  ^^'^  He  told  his  dis- 
ciples, "Every  one  who  shall  confess  me  before  men,  him 
shall  the  Son  of  man  also  confess  before  the  angels  of  God : 
but  he  that  denieth  me  in  the  presence  of  men  shall  be 
denied  in  the  presence  of  the  angels  of  God."  ^^s 

He  told  the  disciples  about  the  woman  who  found  the  lost 
coin,  and  then  added,  "Even  so,  I  say  unto  you,  there  is  joy 
in  the  presence  of  the  angels  of  God  over  one  sinner  that 
repenteth."  ^^e  He  declared  that  those  who  attain  to  the 
resurrection  from  the  dead  are  equal  to  the  angels,  and  die 
no  more.250  In  the  wilderness  of  temptation  the  devil 
quoted  the  promise  of  the  psalm  to  Jesus:  "He  shall  give 
his  angels  charge  concerning  thee,  to  guard  thee,"  ^si  and 
in  the  garden  of  agony  that  promise  was  fulfilled,  for  Luke 
records  that  "there  appeared  to  him  an  angel  from  heaven, 
strengthening  him."  252  As  the  Virgin  had  had  her 
angelic  vision  in  the  beginning,  so  the  holy  women  have 
their  vision  of  angels  at  the  tomb.^^^  Here  and  there 
throughout  the  Gospel  we  hear  echoes  of  angel  songs  and 
catch  glimpses  of  angel  wings.  The  whole  narrative  is 
brightened  with  their  presence  and  their  praise. 

VI.  The  Gospel  and  the  Man  Luke 

Our  knowledge  of  the  man  helps  us  in  our  study  of  the 
Gospel,  for  we  find  that  the  characteristics  of  the  man  are 
the  characteristics  of  the  book.  Some  men  may  have  the 
power  of  concealing  their  own  personality  in  their  writ- 
ings, as  Shakespeare  had.  We  can  learn  little  or  nothing 
about  Shakespeare  himself  by  reading  his  plays.  Most 
men,  however,  write  their  own  characters  into  the  pro- 

"'  9.  26. 

*^  12.  8,  9. 

"•15.  10. 

^20.  36. 

^'4-  10. 

"^=22.  43.    The  passage  is  of  somewhat  doubtful  authenticity. 

="24.  23. 


THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  LUKE  265 

ductions  of  their  pen.  Charles  Lamb  put  his  own  genial 
disposition  into  the  Essays  of  Elia.  Thomas  Carlyle  put 
his  own  crabbed  self  into  his  pamphlets  and  criticisms 
and  histories  and  prophecies.  As  we  read  them  we  know 
what  sort  of  a  man  wrote  them.  They  are  self-revealing. 
Carlyle  could  not  write  another  man's  biography  with- 
out writing  his  autobiography  between  the  lines.  No  more 
could  Luke.  He  writes  the  biography  of  the  Perfect 
Life,  but  he  writes  it  out  of  a  heart  in  perfect  sympathy 
with  that  transcendent  Life.  He  has  a  most  beautiful  sub- 
ject with  which  to  deal,  but  the  subject  alone  would  never 
have  enabled  him  to  make  the  most  beautiful  book  ever 
written.  That  Life  Beautiful  had  to  be  written  into  a 
Book  Beautiful  by  a  soul  beautiful  as  they. 

It  was  Herder  who  suggested  that  Luke  "might  be  called 
the  evangelist  of  Philanthropy,"  and  he  thought  that  such 
a  Gospel  as  this  was  "in  keeping  with  the  character  of  a 
man  who  had  made  numerous  journeys  among  the  Greeks 
and  Romans  with  Paul,  and  who  dedicated  his  writings  to 
a  Theophilus."  254  jt  ^^g  such  a  book  as  a  lover  of  men 
would  write  for  a  lover  of  God. 

Therefore  we  never  shall  cease  to  be  thankful  that,  al- 
though many  others  had  taken  in  hand  to  write  a  narrative 
of  these  matters  before  him,  Luke  felt  constrained  to  say, 
"It  seemed  good  to  me  also,  most  excellent  Theophilus,  to 
write  these  things  for  thee  accurately  and  in  order."  The 
personality  revealed  in  that  phrase,  "me  also,"  finds  explicit 
mention  in  that  first  sentence  of  preface  and  dedication 
alone;  but  the  influence  of  that  personality  is  apparent  to  all 
who  have  eyes  to  see,  and  who  will  take  the  trouble  to  look 
for  it,  in  every  following  page  of  the  Gospel.  Dante  called 
Luke  "the  writer  of  the  story  of  the  gentleness  of 
Christ,"  255  and  only  a  gentle  and  lovable  spirit  could  have 
written  a  story  so  beautiful  in  style  and  in  content  as  this. 

*"  Herder,  Vom  Erloser  der  Menchen,  p.  218. 
'*"  De  Monarchia,  i,  16. 


266     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Ian  MacLaren  has  said,  "There  are  times  when  one  wishes 
he  had  never  read  the  New  Testament  Scriptures — that  he 
might  some  day  open  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke,  and 
the  most  beautiful  book  in  the  world  might  come  upon  his 
soul  like  sunrise."  Has  anyone  ever  been  able  to  read  this 
Gospel  through  without  feeling  that  a  dayspring  from  on 
high  had  visited  him,  to  shine  upon  those  who  sit  in  dark- 
ness and  the  shadow  of  death,  and  to  guide  his  feet  into  the 
way  of  peace  ?  Can  anyone  read  it  now  without  feeling  the 
gospel  sunshine  flooding  his  life? 


PART  IV 
THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM 


PART  IV 
THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM 

I.  Definitions 

It  will  be  well  to  define  our  terms  first  of  all.  i.  The 
Gospels  are  the  four  narratives  of  the  life  of  Christ  found 
in  our  New  Testament.  2.  The  synoptic  Gospels  are  the 
first  three  Gospels  as  distinguished  from  the  fourth.  They 
are  given  this  title  because  they  present  the  same  general 
view  of  the  life  of  Christ.  According  to  the  composition 
of  the  Greek  word  avvoxpi^,  they  "view"  that  life  "together." 
They  resemble  each  other  sufficiently  to  form  a  related 
group.  The  fourth  Gospel  is  so  peculiar  that  it  cannot  be 
put  into  this  group.  Expressed  in  homely  phrase,  the  syn- 
optic Gospels  are  like  birds  of  a  feather  which  flock  to- 
gether: the  fourth  Gospel  is  like  an  eagle  which  flies  alone. 

3.  The  Synoptic  Problem  is  furnished  in  the  fact  that 
while  the  first  three  Gospels  remarkably  resemble  each  other 
in  general,  they  strangely  differ  with  each  other  in  partic- 
ulars. Written  in  parallel  columns  they  present  curiously 
intermingled  phenomena  of  apparent  originality  and  seeming 
plagiarism.  At  various  points  each  appears  to  be  independ- 
ent, while  in  other  places  all  appear  to  be  interdependent. 
Their  narratives  of  incidents  and  discourses  now  approach 
each  other,  now  coalesce,  now  separate,  are  now  identical 
and  now  different.  Their  relationship  is  sometimes  clear  and 
sometimes  obscure.  It  is  like  a  series  of  dissolving  pictures 
in  which  one  unexpectedly  replaces  the  other ;  and  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  define  the  beginning  or  the  end  of  any  of  them. 
There  must  be  some  reason  for  these  things.  There  must  be 
some  explanation  for  these  shifting  phenomena. 

269 


270     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Why  are  there  these  parallelisms  and  these  divergences? 
Why  are  the  synoptics  so  like  each  other  and  yet  so  unhke? 
The  Problem  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels  is  to  find  a  satisfactory 
and  a  sufficient  answer  to  these  questions.  It  is  the  most 
difficult  problem  of  present-day  New  Testament  criticism. 
Possibly  as  much  has  been  written  about  it  as  about  any 
other  problem  in  the  history  of  Hterature,  but  it  has  not  been 
solved  as  yet.  It  is  the  Great  Enigma  of  the  beginning 
of  our  New  Testament  canon  as  the  Apocalypse  is  the  Great 
Enigma  of  its  close.  All  of  the  solutions  of  the  Synoptic 
Problem  thus  far  offered  are  largely  guesses  in  the  dark. 
None  of  them  is  absolutely  satisfactory.  None  of  them 
may  be  more  than  partly  right. 

In  some  places  the  synoptics  are  identical  in  their  state- 
ments. In  other  places  they  are  like  each  other.  In  still 
other  places  they  differ  with  each  other.  In  a  few  instances 
they  contradict  each  other.  These  are  the  facts.  What 
theory  of  their  origin  will  account  for  these  facts  ?  That  is 
our  problem.    We  will  look  at  it  a  little  more  closely  now. 

II,  Resemblances 

Professor  Sanday  has  said,  "Taking  the  three  Gospels 
together,  in  all  their  elements,  the  total  impression  which 
they  convey  is  essentially  harmonious  and  consistent."  ^  All 
will  agree  that  this  is  true.  The  synoptics  tell  the  same 
story  and  they  tell  it  in  much  the  same  way.  They  resemble 
each  other  not  only  in  general  but  also  in  various  minor 
particulars. 

I.  There  is  an  occasional  absolute  identity  of  language. 
This  is  never  very  extensive,  but  it  is  sufficiently  striking 
when  it  occurs. 

(i)  In  one  quotation  from  the  Old  Testament,  found  in 
all  of  the  synoptists,  in  the  original  the  identity  of  language 
reaches  through  fifteen  consecutive  words.    Here  Matthew 

^Expository  Times,  xx,  p.  113. 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  271 

and  Mark  agree  in  saying,  "The  Lord  said  to  my  lord,  Sit 
upon  my  right  hand,  until  I  may  place  thy  enemies  under 
thy  feet,"  and  Luke  agrees  with  them  for  fifteen  words,  but 
diverges  from  them  in  the  end  in  order  to  agree  with  the 
Septuagint  which  reads,  "until  I  may  place  thy  enemies  as 
the  footstool  of  thy  feet."  ^  Another  striking  instance  of 
agreement  between  the  three  synoptists  through  fourteen 
consecutive  words  is  in  their  quotation  from  Isaiah,  "A  voice 
of  one  crying  in  the  wilderness.  Prepare  the  way  of  the 
Lord,  make  his  paths  straight,"  and  it  is  remarkable  that  in 
this  case  they  all  agree  in  misquoting  the  Septuagint  which 
reads,  "Make  straight  the  paths  of  our  God,"  and  this  is  the 
correct  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  original.^ 

(2)  In  one  case  in  the  narrative  portion  of  the  synoptists 
absolute  identity,  including  the  order  of  the  words  in  the 
original  Greek,  extends  through  the  twelve  words,  "the  five 
loaves,  and  the  two  fishes,  having  looked  up  to  heaven,  he 
blessed."  *  In  no  case  in  the  narratives  does  such  agreement 
extend  through  more  than  twelve  words,  and  it  seldom  goes 
beyond  four  or  six  words. 

(3)  In  reporting  the  sayings  of  Jesus  the  synoptists  will 
sometimes  agree  in  as  many  as  eight  successive  words,  but 
there  are  not  half  a  dozen  instances  where  absolute  agree- 
ment is  maintained  through  five  consecutive  words.  If  they 
all  quoted  from  the  Old  Testament  the  same  text  and  the 
same  passage,  and  if  they  all  quoted  correctly,  we  would 
have  an  absolute  agreement  at  these  points.  Such  absolute 
agreement  never  is  found.  If  they  all  reported  the  same 
words  of  Jesus  and  reported  them  exactly,  we  would  have 
perfect  agreement  in  these  portions  of  their  narratives. 
Such  agreement  never  occurs,  extending  through  more  than 
eight  consecutive  words.  This  is  a  strange  fact.  How  can 
we  account  for  these  resemblances  in  absolute  identity  of 


"  Matt.  22.  44 ;  Mark  12.  36 ;  Luke  20.  42,  43. 
'Matt.  3.  3;  Mark  i.  3;  Luke  3.  4. 
*Matt.  14.  19;  Mark  6.  41;  Luke  9.  16. 


272     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

phraseology,  extending  for  a  short  measure  only  and  then 
ceasing  suddenly  and  for  no  apparent  good  reason  ? 

2.  There  are  certain  very  peculiar  words  found  in  our 
New  Testament.  Possibly  the  most  puzzling  of  them  all  is 
the  word  emovoiog,  translated  "daily"  in  the  so-called  Lord's 
Prayer,  in  the  petition,  "Give  us  this  day  our  daily  bread." 
No  one  ever  has  been  certain  that  that  word  was  rightly 
translated.  No  one  is  sure  of  its  meaning  to-day.  Scholar- 
ship always  has  been  divided  upon  the  question.  No  suffi- 
cient data  exist  upon  the  basis  of  which  one  may  come  to 
any  final  conclusion.  The  word  is  not  found  in  ancient  Ht- 
erature  before  the  time  of  the  New  Testament.  It  occurs 
in  only  this  one  connection  in  the  New  Testament.  It  never 
is  found  in  later  literature,  except  in  quotations  from  this 
source.  The  Greek  and  Latin  Fathers  never  could  agree 
upon  its  meaning,  and  modern  scholars  have  no  reason  to 
agree  which  they  had  not. 

Now,  if  such  a  rare  and  absolutely  unique  expression  as 
this  were  found  in  only  one  of  our  synoptists  we  might  think 
that  he  had  coined  it  for  his  own  use ;  but  strangely  enough 
this  strange  word  is  found  in  both  Matthew  and  Luke.  How 
can  we  account  for  that  fact  ?  Did  Jesus  use  some  Aramaic 
term  which  had  been  translated  into  this  unusual  Greek 
expression  by  some  one  not  well  acquainted  with  the  lan- 
guage and  did  both  Matthew  and  Luke  repeat  this  oral  or 
written  translation?  At  many  other  points  we  come  upon 
peculiarities  of  language  which  are  common  to  two  or  to 
three  of  the  synoptists  and  suggest  a  common  source  and 
raise  the  same  question. 

3.  Sometimes  a  narrative  is  told  in  the  same  method  by 
the  three  synoptists,  when  that  method  is  not  one  which 
naturally  would  occur  to  three  independent  writers.  Take 
the  account  of  the  healing  of  the  paralytic  at  Capernaum  for 
an  example.  The  synoptists  all  tell  us  how  Jesus  turned 
upon  the  scribes  on  that  occasion  and  how  in  the  midst  of 
his  address  to  them  he  suddenly  halted  in  the  middle  of  a 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  273 

sentence  and  turned  to  the  paralytic  and  commanded  him  to 
rise  and  go  home.  At  the  same  point  they  all  insert  the 
same  parenthesis,  "Then  saith  he  to  the  sick  of  the  palsy," 
"He  saith  to  the  sick  of  the  palsy,"  "H'.e  said  unto  him  that 
was  palsied."  ^  It  is  remarkable  that  the  three  should 
insert  the  parenthesis  at  exactly  the  same  place  in  the  broken 
narrative.  That  one  writer  independently  should  choose 
this  method  of  telling  the  story  would  be  possible.  That  two 
should  agree  in  it  independently  would  seem  improbable. 
That  three  should  do  so  is  next  to  impossible. 

In  the  account  of  the  cure  of  the  Gerasene  demoniac  there 
is  a  similar  parenthesis,  thrown  in  to  explain  what  has  gone 
before.  First  we  have  the  demoniac's  plea,  "I  adjure  thee 
by  God,  torment  me  not,"  and  then  the  reason  for  that 
adjuration  is  appended:  "For  he  said  unto  him.  Come  forth, 
thou  unclean  spirit,  out  of  the  man."  In  Mark  and  in  Luke 
we  have  the  same  inverted  order,  first  the  remonstrance 
and  then  the  command  which  caused  it.®  The  natural  order 
of  narration  would  have  been  to  give  the  command  first  and 
the  resulting  remonstrance  afterward.  That  one  should 
choose  to  invert  the  order  would  seem  strange.  That  two 
should  agree  in  doing  it  independently  would  seem  most 
improbable.  Other  such  instances  might  be  given.  They 
all  go  to  prove  that  these  stories  for  some  reason  or  another 
had  taken  a  stereotyped  form,  which  is  reproduced  by  each 
narrator. 

4.  In  the  main  the  synoptists  follow  the  same  order  of 
events.  They  resemble  each  other  in  the  chronological 
arrangement  of  their  material.  Sometimes  we  have  a  series 
of  events  in  one  of  them,  leading  up  to  a  crisis  in  the  career 
of  Jesus,  and  then  suddenly  we  seem  to  lose  the  thread  of 
the  narrative;  and  we  turn  to  another  of  the  synoptists  to 
see  what  happened  next,  only  to  find  that  he  has  failed  us 
at  the  very  same  point.    Then  we  turn  to  the  third,  sure  that 

•Matt.  9.  6;  Mark  2.  11;  Luke  5.24. 
•  Mark  5.  7,  8 ;  Luke  8.  28,  29. 


274     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

one  at  least  will  tell  us  what  we  so  much  would  like  to  know, 
and  we  find  that  the  same  period  of  silence  intervenes  in  his 
narrative  at  exactly  the  same  juncture  of  events.  Then 
after  a  certain  interval  of  days  or  months  the  three  will  take 
up  the  story  again  at  exactly  the  same  point.  That  is  what 
we  mean  by  saying  that  the  synoptists  in  general  have  the 
same  order.  That  order  would  seem  to  be  fixed  in  the  Gos- 
pel according  to  Mark.  Frequently  when  Matthew  diverges 
from  the  order  of  Mark,  Luke  will  be  found  to  agree  with 
Mark,  and,  on  the  other  hand  when  Luke  diverges  from 
Mark's  order  at  any  point,  Matthew  frequently  will  follow 
Mark  in  that  place.  Matthew  and  Luke  never  agree  in 
transposing  the  order  of  Mark. 

5.  What  has  just  been  said  leads  us  to  the  next  statement, 
that  the  synoptists  strangely  agree  in  the  selection  of  their 
material.  The  life  of  Jesus  was  the  most  interesting  and  the 
most  remarkable  life  ever  known  to  the  race.  It  was  only 
thirty-three  years  in  length;  but  out  of  those  superlatively 
important  years  our  Gospels  possibly  give  us  incidents  from 
only  forty  days.  There  must  have  been  many  other  days 
just  as  full  of  interest  and  excitement  as  those  which  they 
have  recorded.  Out  of  the  multitudes  of  the  days  why  have 
they  decided  to  tell  us  about  only  forty  of  them?  If  one 
had  chosen  these  forty  days  for  his  record,  why  did  not  an- 
other choose  forty  other  days  just  as  wonderful,  and  the 
third  enrich  our  knowledge  with  the  account  of  still  new  and 
equally  marvelous  material?  It  is  a  strange  fact  that  they 
should  choose  for  the  most  part  to  tell  us  about  the  same 
things.  They  all  mention  the  fact  that  there  were  many 
other  unrecorded  miracles,  and  yet  each  of  the  synoptists 
tells  about  much  the  same  list  of  miracles  which  is  to  be 
found  in  the  others.  When  we  turn  from  the  synoptists 
to  John  we  find  a  new  list  of  miracles  there,  and  we  see  at 
once  that  these  new  miracles  were  just  as  important  as,  or 
possibly  in  some  cases  even  more  important  than,  any  to  be 
found  in  the  synoptists.    The  greatest  of  all  the  miracles, 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  275 

the  raising  of  Lazarus  from  the  dead,  is  found  in  the  fourth 
Gospel  alone.    No  one  of  our  synoptists  has  mentioned  it. 

The  closing  statement  in  the  fourth  Gospel  is  to  the  effect 
that  there  are  also  many  other  things  which  Jesus  did,  the 
which  if  they  should  be  written  every  one,  it  might  be  sup- 
posed that  even  the  world  itself  would  not  contain  the  books 
that  should  be  written.'^  There  was  an  abundance  of  mate- 
rial known  to  the  eyewitnesses  of  the  ministry  of  the  Lord 
which  is  now  lost  forever.  Why  did  not  our  synoptists  do 
as  the  author  of  the  fourth  Gospel  did  and  each  of  them  give 
us  an  original  and  fresh  putting  of  the  life  of  Jesus,  with 
fresh  material  chosen  from  this  inexhaustible  abundance  of 
supply,  instead  of  telling  the  same  story  over  in  much  the 
same  way  ? 

We  know  so  Httle  of  what  Jesus  did.  We  should  like  to 
know  so  much  more.  We  know  so  little  of  what  Jesus 
said.  We  would  esteem  every  added  word  we  could  be 
assured  fell  from  his  lips  as  an  invaluable  treasure.  Yet 
all  the  recorded  sayings  of  Jesus  could  be  spoken  in  six 
hours.  What  a  meager  measure  of  the  words  of  life  that 
is !  Six  hours  of  golden  speech  and  over  all  the  rest  of  the 
life  a  pall  of  perfect  silence!  We  have  learned  to  content 
ourselves  with  what  we  have,  and  yet  why  did  our  synoptists 
choose  to  give  us  so  much  common  material  when  each  of 
them  might  have  added  much  which  would  have  been 
peculiar  to  him  and  thus  have  made  us  so  much  the  richer  in 
our  possession  of  the  facts  concerning  the  life  and  the  truths 
enunciated  in  the  teachings  of  Jesus? 

The  synoptists  resemble  each  other,  sometimes  in  absolute 
identity  of  expression,  sometimes  in  peculiarities  of  lan- 
guage, sometimes  in  the  method  followed  in  an  individual 
narration,  and  in  general  in  the  order  of  their  chronicle  and 
in  the  selection  of  their  facts.  What  reason  is  there  for 
these  likenesses?  The  individuality  of  each  of  the  evangel- 
ists has  been  overruled  by  some  external  fact  to  produce 

'John  21.  25. 


276     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

these  conformities  to  one  model  and  these  uniformities  of 
result. 

Ill,  Differences 

To  get  the  Synoptic  Problem  clearly  before  us  we  also 
must  look  at  the  differences  between  them.  It  would  be 
comparatively  easy  to  account  for  their  resemblances  on  the 
ground  of  the  influence  of  an  external  and  controlling 
norm,  but  the  problem  becomes  more  complicated  when  we 
take  their  differences  into  consideration.  The  question  at 
once  arises,  If  there  were  any  such  controUing  norm  as  their 
resemblances  would  indicate,  why  has  it  not  controlled  more 
completely?  What  reason  can  be  suggested  for  such  di- 
vergences as  we  shall  now  consider? 

I.  They  differ  in  the  transposition  of  sentences  and  para- 
graphs in  the  account  both  of  incidents  and  of  sayings  in 
the  life  of  Jesus.  For  example,  Matthew  gives  the  order  of 
the  temptations  of  Jesus  in  the  wilderness  as,  first,  the  turn- 
ing of  stones  into  bread;  and,  second,  the  casting  of  him- 
self down  from  the  pinnacle  of  the  temple;  and,  third,  the 
worshiping  of  Satan  for  the  kingdoms  of  the  world.  Luke 
gives  us  the  same  story  of  the  temptation,  but  he  puts  the 
third  of  Matthew's  list  of  temptations  second  and  the  second 
he  puts  last.  There  is  no  apparent  reason  for  such  a  trans- 
position. If  this  narrative  were  intended  to  be  taken  as  a 
literal  narrative  of  facts,  then  of  course  both  Matthew  and 
Luke  could  not  be  correct  in  their  order  of  the  events.^ 

In  Matthew's  narrative  Jesus  prophesies  that  the  men  of 
Nineveh  shall  condemn  the  men  of  his  generation  and  then 
goes  on  to  say  the  same  thing  of  the  queen  of  the  south. 
Luke  repeats  these  sayings  but  reverses  their  order.^  In 
the  account  of  the  Last  Supper  Mark  and  Matthew  tell  about 
the  giving  of  the  bread  and  then  the  giving  of  the  cup  to 
the  disciples.    Luke  introduces  a  giving  of  the  cup  before 


*Matt.  4.  i-ii;  Luke  4.  1-13. 
•Matt.  12.  41,  42;  Luke  11.  31,  32. 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  ^J 

the  breaking  of  the  bread  and  connects  with  it  some  of  the 
language  assigned  by  the  other  synoptists  to  the  cup  given 
after  the  supper.^"  These  seem  to  be  strange  and  unex- 
pected and  unaccountable  divergences.  Can  any  one  give 
any  sufficient  and  satisfactory  explanation  of  them? 

2.  There  are  strange  omissions  in  each  of  the  synoptists. 
If  they  were  following  a  common  source,  how  are  we  to  ac- 
count for  them?  We  understand  that  Luke  was  a  Gentile, 
and  that  he  took  every  opportunity  to  emphasize  any  por- 
tion of  the  teaching  of  Jesus  which  made  clear  the  fact  that 
his  gospel  was  a  gospel  for  the  Gentiles  as  well  as  for  the 
Jews.  If  that  be  true,  how  does  it  happen  that  Mark  tells 
us  that  Jesus  taught  the  people  in  the  temple,  saying,  "Is  it 
not  written,  My  house  shall  be  called  a  house  of  prayer  for 
all  the  Gentiles,"  and  Luke  repeats  the  saying,  "My  house 
shall  be  a  house  of  prayer,"  but  omits  the  significant  phrase 
"for  all  the  Gentiles"?  ^^  We  would  have  supposed  that 
Luke  would  be  sure  to  put  that  in,  yet  he  omits  it. 

In  Mark  we  read,  "The  gospel  must  first  be  preached  unto 
all  the  Gentiles,"  and  in  Matthew  we  read  the  same  state- 
ment, "This  gospel  of  the  kingdom  shall  be  preached  in 
the  whole  world  for  a  testimony  unto  all  the  Gentiles." 
Then  we  turn  to  Luke  and  we  find  that  he  gives  the  same 
discourse  of  Jesus  concerning  the  last  things  and  Luke's 
account  parallels  that  of  Mark  and  Matthew  at  almost  every 
point,  and  yet,  strangely  enough,  when  we  come  to  this  state- 
ment concerning  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  to  all  of  the 
Gentiles  we  find  that  Luke  omits  it.^^  We  would  have 
thought  that  there  was  no  saying  in  that  discourse  which 
Luke  would  have  been  so  eager  to  record  as  that  one.  How 
can  we  explain  such  an  omission?  In  Mark  7.  31  we  are 
told  that  Jesus  made  a  journey  through  the  Gentile  cities  of 
Decapolis,  and  Mark  gives  some  account  of  the  things  which 

"Matt  26.  26-29;  Mark  14.  22-25;  Luke  22.  17-19. 

"Mark.  11.  17;  Luke  19.  46. 

"Mark  13.  10;  Matt.  24.  14;     Luke  21.  8-19. 


278     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

happened  there.  Luke  omits  all  mention  of  this  journey 
and  of  these  things.  How  strange  that  is!  He  must  have 
been  interested  in  these  happenings  in  a  very  special  degree, 
since  he  was  in  all  probability  a  Gentile.  Why  does  he 
make  no  mention  of  them  ? 

Compare  what  Matthew  calls  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount 
with  what  Luke  calls  the  Sermon  on  the  Plain.  They  seem 
to  be  the  same  discourse.  Yet  Matthew  says  that  Jesus 
went  up  into  the  mountain  and  sat  down  to  preach  that 
sermon,  and  Luke  says  that  Jesus  came  down  and  stood 
on  a  level  place  while  he  talked. ^^  In  Matthew  the  sermon 
begins  with  eight  beatitudes.  In  Luke  there  are  but  four, 
corresponding  to  Matthew's  first,  second,  fourth,  and 
eighth;  and  the  first  three  of  these  seem  to  be  so  materially 
changed  that  we  scarcely  can  recognize  their  spiritual  char- 
acter. Then  Luke  adds  four  woes  corresponding  to  his  four 
beatitudes,  which  have  no  parallel  in  Matthew.  What  seems 
to  be  a  single  discourse  in  Matthew  we  find  to  be  scattered 
in  fragments  throughout  Luke's  narrative  from  the  sixth 
to  the  sixteenth  chapters.  Following  the  order  of  the  dis- 
course in  Matthew,  we  find  the  corresponding  sayings  in 
Luke  first  in  the  sixth  chapter,  then  in  the  sixteenth,  then 
in  the  twelfth,  then  in  the  sixth,  then  in  the  eleventh,  then 
in  the  twelfth,  then  in  the  eleventh,  then  in  the  sixteenth, 
then  in  the  twelfth,  then  in  the  sixth,  then  in  the  eleventh, 
then  in  the  sixth,  then  in  the  thirteenth,  then  in  the  sixth, 
then  in  the  thirteenth,  then  in  the  sixth  again.  Has  Luke 
given  us  the  proper  setting  for  these  several  fragments  of 
discourse,  or  did  Jesus  repeat  himself  and  gather  up  into 
one  discourse  what  he  had  said  on  several  other  occasions? 
Shall  we  trust  Matthew  alone,  or  Luke  alone,  or  both  ? 

3.  A  third  difference  is  in  the  insertion  of  long  narratives. 
The  best  example  is  to  be  found  in  what  is  usually  called 
"the  greater  insertion"  in  Luke.    In  the  middle  of  his  nar- 


"  Alatt.  5.  I ;  Luke  6.  17. 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  279 

rative  Luke  has  given  us  a  large  section,  the  most  of  the 
material  in  which  is  peculiar  to  him.^*  The  other  Gospels 
pass  these  events  over  in  silence,  and  yet  some  of  them  are 
among  the  most  remarkable  in  our  Lord's  ministry.  Alto- 
gether about  three  fifths  of  the  contents  of  Luke  are  not  to 
be  found  in  the  other  Gospels.  Stroud  made  a  mathematical 
presentation  of  the  facts  in  his  familiar  table.  If  the  con- 
tents of  the  several  Gospels  be  represented  by  100,  then 
Mark  has  7  peculiarities  and  93  coincidences.  Matthew 
has  42  peculiarities  and  58  coincidences.  Luke  has  59  pe- 
culiarities and  41  coincidences.^^  This  table  shows  that  in 
Mark  there  is  very  little  which  is  not  paralleled  in  the  other 
Gospels,  more  than  half  of  the  contents  of  Matthew  is 
repeated  in  the  other  synoptics,  and  more  than  two  fifths 
of  the  contents  of  Luke.  Nevertheless  it  remains  true  that 
in  each  of  the  Gospels  there  are  insertions  of  narratives  and 
discourses  not  to  be  found  in  the  others. 

4.  There  are  puzzling  differences  in  the  report  of  the 
same  incident  or  the  same  saying.  In  the  storm  on  the  lake 
the  disciples  wake  Jesus  with  a  cry  of  terror.  Mark  reports 
it,  "Master,  carest  thou  not  that  we  perish?"  Matthew  says 
they  said,  "Save,  Lord ;  we  perish" ;  and  Luke  changes  it 
again,  "Master,  master,  we  perish."  ^^  These  are  not  im- 
portant difTerences.  We  note  them  simply  as  examples  of 
the  slight  changes  in  the  narratives  found  on  every  page. 
In  the  saying  of  Jesus,  "It  is  easier  for  a  camel  to  go 
through  the  eye  of  a  needle,"  we  find  one  word  for  "eye" 
in  Mark  and  another  in  Matthew  and  Luke^"^ :  and  we  find 
one  word  for  "needle"  in  Luke  and  another  in  Matthew 
and  Mark.'^  In  Matthew  and  Mark  we  read  that  Herod 
said  to  others,  "This  is  John  the  Baptist:  he  is  risen  from 

"  Luke  9.  45  to  18.  30. 

"Westcott,  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels,  p.  177. 

"  Mark  4-  38 ;  Matt.  8.  25 ;  Luke  8.  24. 

'^  Tpu/MiXtai,  Mark  10.  25;  TpiJ/xaTos  Matt.  19.  24;  Luke  18.  25. 

"^«X6;^s,   Luke  18.  25;  pa(pldoi,  Matt.  19.  24;  Mark  10.  25. 


28o     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

the  dead."  In  Luke  we  read  that  others  said  this  to 
Herod.^^  In  the  account  of  the  crucifixion  Mark  says  that 
one  ran  and  filled  a  sponge  full  of  vinegar  and  put  it  on  a 
reed,  and  gave  it  to  Jesus  to  drink,  saying,  "Let  be ;  let  us 
see  whether  Elijah  cometh  to  take  him  down."  In  Mat- 
thew we  find  the  same  account,  but  this  speech,  "Let  be;  let 
us  see  whether  Elijah  cometh  to  save  him,"  is  put  into  the 
mouth  of  the  bystanders.20  Examples  of  such  differences 
could  be  multiplied  indefinitely. 

5.  Sometimes  statements  are  made  by  one  of  the  synoptists 
which  would  lead  us  to  mistaken  conclusions  if  another  of 
the  synoptists  did  not  set  us  right  in  the  matter.  For  ex- 
ample, if  we  had  only  Matthew's  account  of  the  birth  and 
infancy  of  Jesus  we  would  suppose  that  Joseph  and  Mary 
went  to  Nazareth  only  after  the  return  from  Egypt  and  in 
consequence  of  a  divine  warning  in  a  dream.  However, 
from  Luke  we  learn  that  Nazareth  was  the  home  city  of 
the  parents  of  Jesus,  that  they  left  it  and  went  to  Bethle- 
hem only  for  the  census,  and  that  after  the  presentation  in 
the  temple  they  returned  to  Nazareth.  If  we  had  Luke's 
account  of  the  resurrection  appearances  of  Jesus  and  no 
other,  we  would  have  supposed  that  all  of  these  were  in 
the  neighborhood  of  Jerusalem ;  but  Matthew  tells  us  plainly 
of  an  appearance  in  Galilee  as  well. 

6.  The  synoptists  sometimes  contradict  each  other.  In 
Luke  3.  3  we  read  that  John  the  Baptist  came  into  all  the 
region  round  about  Jordan.  In  Matt.  3.  5  the  statement  is 
that  all  the  region  round  about  Jordan  went  out  unto  John. 
In  Mark  6.  8,  9  Jesus  expressly  permits  the  twelve  to  carry 
a  staff  and  to  go  shod  with  sandals.  In  Matt.  10.  10  Jesus 
expressly  prohibits  these  things.  It  evidently  is  the  same 
discourse,  and  it  is  seemingly  impossible  for  both  evangel- 
ists to  be  correct.    Jesus  either  permitted  or  prohibited  these 


^'  Matt.  14.  2 ;  Mark  6.  16 ;  Luke  9.  7. 
""Mark  15.  36;  Matt.  2"^.  49. 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  281 

things.  He  could  not  have  done  both  at  one  and  the  same 
time.  Mark  tells  us  that  Herodias  desired  to  kill  John  but 
she  could  not  because  Herod  feared  him.  Matthew  says 
that  Herod  desired  to  kill  John  and  did  not,  because  he 
feared  the  multitude.^i  These  statements  are  not  neces- 
sarily contradictory,  although  they  are  apparently  so. 

Matthew  and  Mark  both  say  that  the  transfiguration  took 
place  six  days  after  the  events  just  recorded  by  them. 
Luke  explicitly  says  that  it  took  place  eight  days  after  these 
things.22  Matthew  says  that  Jesus  commanded  his  disciples 
to  pray  after  the  manner  which  he  records  in  his  Sermon  on 
the  Mount.  Luke  records  this  prayer  upon  another  occa- 
sion and  not  at  all  after  that  manner.  He  omits  two  of  the 
petitions  found  in  Matthew  and  changes  two  of  the  others. 
Matthew  would  have  us  pray  after  one  manner,  Luke  would 
have  us  pray  differently ;  and  as  a  matter  of  fact,  most  of  us 
repeat  the  prayer  in  a  manner  different  from  that  prescribed 
by  either  of  them.^^ 

In  Mark  Jairus  tells  Jesus  that  his  daughter  is  at  the 
point  of  death.  In  Matthew  Jairus  says  that  she  is  already 
dead.2-»  In  Matt.  8.  5  we  read  that  the  centurion  came  to 
Jesus  himself.  In  Luke  7.  3  we  read  that  he  sent  unto  Jesus 
some  of  the  Jews.  Matthew  seems  to  put  the  profaning  of 
the  Sabbath  by  plucking  ears  of  corn  and  eating  them  and 
by  curing  the  man  with  the  withered  hand  on  the  same 
Sabbath.  Luke  explicitly  says  that  the  miracle  of  the  cure 
was  performed  on  another  Sabbath. 2°  In  Mark  Peter's 
denial  follows  the  trial  before  the  Sanhedrin,  while  in  Luke 
it  precedes  it.  Mark  says  that  the  women  came  to  the  tomb 
when  the  Sabbath  was  past.  Matthew  says  that  they  came 
late  on  the  Sabbath.    Luke  says  that  they  came  on  the  first 

"Mark  6.  19,  20;  Matt.  14.  5. 

"  Matt.  17.  I ;  Mark  9.  2;  Luke  9.  28. 

"Matt.  6.  9-13;  Luke  11.  2-4. 

"  Mark  5.  2^ ;  Matt.  9.  18. 

''Matt.  12.  1-14;  Luke  6.  i-ii. 


282     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

day  of  the  week,  at  early  dawn.^^  If  Mark  and  Luke  are 
right,  Matthew  must  be  wrong. 

Mark  tells  us  that  as  Jesus  went  out  from  Jericho,  the 
blind  beggar,  Bartimseus,  was  healed.  Matthew  says  that 
as  they  went  out  from  Jericho  two  blind  men  were  healed. 
Luke  says  that  as  Jesus  drew  nigh  unto  Jericho  a  certain 
blind  man  was  healed,  and  from  his  account  we  conclude 
that  it  was  the  man  whom  Mark  called  Bartimseus.^'^  Why 
does  Matthew  say  there  were  two  blind  men,  while  Mark 
and  Luke  mention  only  one?  Why  do  Mark  and  Mat- 
thew locate  the  healing  at  the  time  of  leaving  Jericho,  while 
Luke  puts  it  at  the  time  of  entering  the  city?  They  can- 
not all  be  right.  Some  one  has  blundered.  In  the  narrative 
of  Mark  we  gather  that  Peter's  second  denial  was  in  answer 
to  a  challenge  made  by  the  same  young  woman  who  had  first 
identified  him.  In  Matthew  we  are  explicitly  told  that  it 
was  another  young  woman  who  made  this  second  charge. 
In  Luke  we  are  surprised  to  read  that  this  second  accusation 
was  made  by  a  man.^s 

This  list  of  apparent  and  real  contradictions  might  be  in- 
creased. However,  none  of  the  other  cases  are  of  any 
greater  importance  than  these  we  have  instanced;  and  all 
will  agree  that  particulars  like  these  are  not  essential  to 
the  conception  of  the  life  and  work  of  Christ.  The  im- 
portant fact  in  the  case  of  Bartimaeus,  for  instance,  is  the 
fact  of  the  healing  and  not  the  exact  spot  on  which  it  took 
place,  and  the  important  fact  in  the  case  of  Peter  is  his 
denial  and  not  the  person  or  persons  who  occasioned  it. 

We  now  have  seen  that  the  synoptists  follow  the  same 
general  order  of  narration,  repeat  each  other  in  much  or 
most  of  their  material,  sometimes  follow  the  same  strange 
method  of  telling  their  story,  sometimes  reproduce  certain 
peculiarities  of  language,   and   sometimes  are  not  merely 

^Mark  i6.  2;  Matt.  28.  i;  Luke  24.  i. 

-'Matt.  20.  29-34;  Mark  10.  46-52;  Luke  18.  35-43. 

"^Mark  14.  69;  Matt.  26.  71,  axXij;  Luke  22.  58,  ^t€/)os. 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  283 

parallel  but  absolutely  identical  in  their  expression.  On 
the  other  hand,  we  have  seen  that  they  do  not  always  fol- 
low the  same  order  in  their  narratives,  and  each  of  them 
adds  to  the  narratives  of  the  others,  and  each  of  them  omits 
portions  of  the  narratives  of  the  others,  and  each  of  them 
transposes  the  narratives  of  the  others,  and  they  give  dif- 
ferent accounts  of  the  same  event  or  the  same  saying,  and 
they  apparently  or  really  contradict  each  other  at  many 
points.  How  are  we  to  explain  these  strange  phenomena? 
That  is  the  problem,  and  Professor  Iverach  says  of  it,  "No 
more  complex  problem  was  ever  set  to  literary  criticism  than 
that  presented  by  the  similarities  and  differences  of  the 
synoptic  Gospels."  29 

IV.  Responsibilities 

I.  Let  us  say,  first  of  all,  that  Jesus  is  not  directly  re- 
sponsible for  the  record  found  in  our  synoptics  or  for  the 
form  in  which  that  record  has  been  made.  He  never  inter- 
ested himself  in  such  things.  He  himself  never  wrote  any- 
thing while  he  was  upon  the  earth,  as  far  as  we  know,  except 
upon  one  occasion  when  he  wrote  with  his  finger  in  the  dust 
upon  the  temple  floor  something  or  other  of  great  moment 
to  those  who  were  looking  on ;  but  we  can  only  guess  what  it 
was,  and  we  know  that  that  writing  was  obliterated  and 
lost  long  ago.  Jesus  never  dictated  anything  to  anyone  for 
later  publication,  as  far  as  we  know,  and  we  do  not  know 
that  anyone  ever  thought  of  taking  notes  of  any  of  his  say- 
ings or  doings  while  he  was  still  with  them.  We  read  in 
one  place  that  his  disciples  remembered  that  he  had  said  cer- 
tain things  only  after  his  resurrection  from  the  dead.  Evi- 
dently, they  had  no  written  notes  from  which  to  refresh 
their  memories  of  these  things. 

We  do  not  gather  from  our  records  that  Jesus  ever  took 
any   special  pains   to   impress   any   particular   phraseology 

*"  International  Standard  Bible  Encyclopaedia,  p.  1282. 


284     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

upon  the  minds  of  his  followers.  Possibly  the  formulation 
of  the  so-called  Lord's  Prayer  might  stand  as  a  single  ex- 
ample of  that  sort,  and  we  have  seen  how  in  that  case  we 
have  very  different  versions  handed  down  to  us.  Then  if 
Jesus  neither  dictated  anything  nor  wrote  anything  nor 
taught  anything  with  patient  repetitions  until  he  was  sure 
that  the  disciples  had  it  committed  with  verbal  exactness 
which  would  insure  absolute  integrity  in  its  preservation, 
it  would  seem  that  he  was  not  convinced  of  the  necessity 
of  any  such  thing  and  was  willing  that  the  record  of  his  life 
and  words  should  be  left  to  the  chances  of  imperfect  re- 
membrance and  something  less  than  infallible  accuracy  of 
preservation.  At  any  rate,  his  evident  negligence  to  provide 
any  written  memorials  in  his  lifetime  will  clear  him  of  all 
responsibility  for  our  synoptic  Gospels  in  the  exact  form  in 
which  we  have  them  to-day.  They  were  produced  after 
his  death.  The  responsibility  for  them  must  lie  in  other 
hands. 

2.  Let  us  say,  in  the  second  place,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
not  responsible  for  the  exact  form  in  which  our  synoptics 
appear.  The  doctrine  of  literal  verbal  inspiration  surely 
must  go  to  pieces  in  any  candid  mind  before  the  parallel 
columns  of  Rushbrooke's  Synopticon  or  Wright's  Synopsis 
of  the  Gospels  in  Greek  or  Thompson's  The  Synoptic 
Gospels.  The  minute  and  meaningless  variations  in  these 
parallel  columns  would  convict  any  man  of  irreverence 
and  irrationality,  if  he  could  be  proved  to  be  individ- 
ually responsible  for  them.  The  purposelessness  and  the 
frivolity  of  these  almost  numberless  and  wholly  insig- 
nificant changes  from  one  tense  to  another  and  from  one 
mood  to  another  and  from  one  number  to  another  and  from 
one  case  to  another  would  be  just  as  apparent  if  the  respon- 
sibility for  them  were  thrown  back  upon  the  Holy  Spirit. 
We  find  one  order  of  words  in  one  synoptist.  We  find  an- 
other order  of  the  same  words  in  another  synoptist.  No 
possible  reason  can  be  assigned  for  the  change  in  the  order. 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  285 

The  meaning  is  not  changed ;  the  emphasis  is  not  changed. 
It  seems  to  be  a  purely  arbitrary  choice  on  the  part  of  each 
writer.  That  is  an  explanation  of  the  change ;  but  if  a  single 
personality  were  made  responsible  for  both  forms,  we 
would  at  once  challenge  the  sense  or  the  use  of  it.  We 
have  too  much  reverence  for  the  Holy  Spirit  to  say  that  he 
is  responsible  for  these  textual,  verbal,  literal  changes. 

3.  We  conclude  then,  in  the  third  place,  that  these  phe- 
nomena both  of  resemblance  and  of  divergence  in  the  synop- 
tists  must  rest  in  the  last  analysis  upon  the  responsibility  and 
the  personality  of  the  individual  authors  or  compilers.  In 
the  Royal  Art  Museum  in  Berlin  there  is  a  picture  of  Mat- 
thew writing  his  Gospel.  He  is  represented  as  an  old  man 
with  a  flowing  beard,  seated  at  a  desk  upon  which  there  is 
a  roll.  Behind  him  stands  an  angel  who  reaches  over  his 
shoulder  and  guides  his  pen.  There  is  a  look  of  intense  sur- 
prise on  Matthew's  face,  as  he  sees  what  his  own  hand, 
guided  by  the  angel,  has  written.  The  picture  represents  a 
once  common  conception  of  inspiration ;  the  arbitrary, 
mechanical  guidance  of  a  pen  rather  than  the  inspiration  of 
a  man.  God  glides  no  man's  pen  as  the  mechanical  in- 
strument of  his  will.  He  moves  some  man's  heart,  and  the 
man,  heart-stirred,  moves  his  own  pen  with  active  brain 
and  willing  hand.  God  does  not  send  messages  through 
human  telephones.  His  words  are  not  repeated  by  human 
phonographs.  His  messengers  are  not  impassive  instru- 
ments but  active,  able,  free-will  agents,  called  and  responsive 
to  the  call. 

Holy  men  of  old  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  not  as 
the  primitive  chaos  was  moved  by  that  same  Spirit,  not 
arbitrarily  but  voluntarily.  The  evolution  and  the  realiza- 
tion of  God's  designs  in  them  was  conditioned  by  their  hu- 
man intelligence  and  by  their  human  receptivity.  God's 
inspiration  always  took  on  the  stamp  of  the  individuality 
of  the  human  personahty  which  appropriated  it.  God's 
messengers  who  dwelt  among  men  have  been  men  like  other 


286     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

men.  His  greatest  message  was  sent  through  his  Son  as  a 
man.  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  John,  Paul,  and  Jesus  were 
not  abnormally  appropriated  to  the  proclamation  of  God's 
will.  They  were  not  moved  in  spite  of  themselves  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  they  were  not  moved  out  of  themselves. 
The  Holy  Spirit  moved  them,  and  in  their  own  personalities 
they  worked  out  the  designs  of  God.  Human  individuality 
is  apparent  on  every  page  of  our  New  Testament,  and  no- 
where more  so  than  in  the  pages  of  the  synoptists.  These 
men  differed  in  mental  equipment  and  literary  style,  and  in 
personal  prejudices  and  preferences,  and  in  spiritual  insight 
and  in  sources  of  information :  and  these  differences  appear 
in  their  books. 

Having  concluded  that  the  phenomena  which  constitute 
the  Synoptic  Problem  must  find  their  ultimate  explanation 
in  the  individualities  of  the  authors  or  compilers  of  the 
synoptic  Gospels  we  are  far  from  having  disposed  of  our 
difficulties.  The  next  question  is.  How  does  it  happen  that 
these  individuals  have  composed  or  compiled  Gospels  in 
which  these  strange  resemblances  and  differences  exist  ? 

Y.  Aids 

I.  Luke's  Preface.  Matthew  and  Mark  have  told  us 
nothing  at  all  about  the  method  of  their  procedure  in  writing 
their  books.  Luke,  however,  has  written  a  preface  to  his 
narrative  in  which  he  makes  some  statements  concerning 
the  sources  of  information  upon  which  he  has  drawn  in  its 
composition.  He  was  not  an  eyewitness  of  the  events  in  the 
Gospel  history.  He  does  not  say  that  any  special  revelation 
had  been  given  him  concerning  these  things.  He  does  not 
write  at  the  direction  of  any  heavenly  voice  or  at  the  dicta- 
tion of  any  supernatural  visitant.  He  does  not  assert  that 
he  had  any  direct  or  peculiar  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
H  Luke  had  been  able  to  claim  any  extraordinary  and  all- 
sufficing  authority  of  that  sort  he  surely  would  have  men- 
tioned it.     He  is  anxious  to  authenticate  his  narrative  and 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  287 

to  establish  its  trustworthiness,  and  he  gives  to  Theophilus 
the  best  reasons  he  has  for  believing  that  he  has  written  the 
certain  truth.    What  does  he  say? 

He  says  that  he  writes  of  his  own  accord,  and  the  only 
credential  he  presents  is  that  of  painstaking  investigation  of 
all  the  sources  of  information  at  his  command.  He  certifies, 
however,  that  the  result  of  this  investigation  is  in  his  judg- 
ment a  fuller,  more  accurate,  and  more  orderly  account  of 
the  life  of  Jesus  than  any  of  which  he  knew.  He  divides 
the  chief  sources  of  the  facts  he  has  written  into  documen- 
tary material  and  oral  testimony.  There  had  been  many  at- 
tempts at  narrative  of  which  in  their  manuscript  form  he 
was  able  to  avail  himself  and  upon  which  he  felt  he  had 
been  able  to  improve.  There  were  also  many  eye-witnesses 
still  living  whom  he  was  able  to  interview  and  who  delivered 
to  him  their  first-hand  information  concerning  many  things. 
Upon  the  basis  of  his  documents  and  the  careful  recording 
of  apostolic  tradition  as  given  to  himself  Luke  assures 
Theophilus  that  he  may  rely  upon  the  certainty  of  the  things 
he  here  finds  recorded.-^''  This  is  all  of  the  gratuitous  in- 
formation furnished  us  in  the  synoptic  Gospels  concerning 
their  composition.  If  we  learn  anything  more,  it  must  be 
by  the  study  of  their  internal  characteristics  and  peculiar- 
ities. 

2.  Minute  Research.  An  immense  amount  of  work  has 
been  done  in  this  field.  As  a  single  example  we  might  cite 
the  Seminar  formed  in  the  University  of  Oxford  for  the 
study  of  the  Synoptic  Problem.  It  met  nine  times  a  year 
for  sixteen  years.  Then  the  results  of  the  patient  and  united 
efforts  of  these  scholars  were  published  in  the  volume 
entitled  Studies  in  the  Synoptic  Problem.  Other  volumes, 
like  Sir  J.  C.  Hawkins's  Horae  Synopticae,  are  marvels  of 
minute  research  and  represent  a  lifetime  of  labor.  It  would 
seem  safe  to  say  that  every  possible  scrap  of  evidence  has 

*Luke  I.  1-4. 


288     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

been  accumulated  through  the  successive  generations  of  un- 
grudging drudgery  at  the  task. 

Possibly  the  minute  pedantry  of  the  ancient  rabbis  has 
been  more  nearly  reproduced  in  the  study  of  the  Synoptic 
Problem  than  in  any  other  part  of  our  Scriptures.  Those 
ancient  scribes  and  masters  of  the  law  knew  how  many 
verses  and  how  many  words  and  how  many  letters  there 
were  in  every  book  of  their  Bible.  They  knew  how  many 
times  certain  words  occurred  at  the  beginning  of  a  verse  and 
how  many  times  at  the  end  of  a  verse.  They  knew  all  the 
petty  phenomena  as  well  as  the  weightier  matters  in  the  law. 
The  same  thing  has  come  to  be  true  of  the  three  synoptic 
Gospels.  They  have  been  subjected  to  microscopic  investiga- 
tion. Every  last  detail  has  been  considered  in  its  bearing 
upon  the  solution  of  their  relationship. 

We  sometimes  have  thought  that  the  erudition  displayed 
in  the  study  of  the  Synoptic  Problem  is  like  that  of  the 
Scholastics  of  the  Dark  Ages.  Milman  says  of  these, 
"Latin  Christianity  raised  up  those  vast  monuments  of 
theology  which  amaze  and  appall  the  mind  with  the  enor- 
mous accumulation  of  intellectual  industry,  ingenuity,  and 
toil:  but  of  which  the  sole  result  to  posterity  is  this  barren 
amazement."  An  amazing  amount  of  scholarship  has  been 
expended  upon  the  Synoptic  Problem  in  the  last  two  cen- 
turies, and  he  would  be  a  very  hopeful  man  who  would 
think  that  the  final  word  on  the  question  was  within  sight 
or  hearing  to-day.  Eminently  learned  and  ingenious  men 
have  had  their  say  about  it.  They  have  been  eminently 
critical  too.  Their  investigations  have  rivaled  those  of  the 
Schoolmen  in  their  painstaking  minuteness.  They  have 
been  thorough  in  their  research.  They  have  accumulated 
and  assorted  vast  quantities  of  facts.  Many  of  them  have 
been  very  assured  in  the  announcement  of  their  results. 
They  have  held  opposing  and  mutually  destructive  theories, 
and  they  have  fought,  bled,  and  died  in  their  behalf.  Each 
generation  has  quietly  buried  the  combatants  of  the  preced- 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  289 

ing  generation  and  in  many  cases  their  theories  have  been 
quietly  laid  to  rest  with  them.  Probably  some  of  these 
theories  are  dead  beyond  all  hope  of  resurrection. 

We  think  that  some  things  are  pretty  generally  agreed 
upon  in  our  day.  Yet  there  are  very  strenuous  advocates 
of  rival  hypotheses  still  in  the  field.  No  man  who  volun- 
teers to  settle  the  whole  question  for  us  can  command  the 
universal  suffrage  of  scholars.  Frequently  he  represents  no 
one  but  himself.  Any  new  discovery  of  manuscripts  may 
revolutionize  the  whole  aspect  of  things  at  any  time.  Under 
such  circumstances  no  one  can  prophesy  with  any  degree 
of  assurance  what  the  verdict  of  the  next  generation  or 
the  next  century  will  be. 

VI.  Theories 

At  present  the  Problem  of  the  synoptic  Gospels  has  re- 
solved itself  into  the  problem  of  the  sources  from  which  the 
synoptists  drew  the  material  for  their  Gospels.  Gloag  says, 
"It  is  the  most  difficult  problem  in  the  criticism  of  the  New 
Testament."  31  The  two  main  sources  are  those  suggested 
in  the  preface  to  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke,  oral  testi- 
mony and  written  documents :  and  the  two  most  active  dif- 
fering schools  of  thought  on  the  subject  to-day  are,  first,  the 
one  which  pins  its  faith  largely,  if  not  wholly,  upon  the  oral 
tradition  as  accounting  for  the  resemblances  and  the  differ- 
ences in  the  synoptic  Gospels,  and,  second,  the  one  which 
pins  its  faith  largely,  if  not  wholly,  upon  a  single  original 
document  or  a  series  of  such  as  an  adequate  explanation 
for  all  the  puzzling  features  which  the  synoptics  present. 

I.  Oral  Tradition.  Gieseler,  Westcott,  and  Wright  have 
been  the  protagonists  for  the  Oral  Tradition  Theory.  It  is 
not  always  easy  to  assign  the  critics  to  one  school  rather 
than  another,  since  each  is  apt  to  hold  an  attitude  more  or 
less  mediating  or  more  or  less  independent,  but  possibly 
Credner,   Neudecker,   Norton,   Lachmann,   Lange,  Lumby, 

•'  Gloag,  Introduction  to  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  p.  43. 


^90     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Plumptre,  Ebrard,  Thiersch,  Abbott,  Alford,  Renan,  Farrar, 
Schaff,  Thomson,  Row,  Wendt,  Guericke,  Godet,  Gould,  and 
Weiss  might  be  classed  together  here. 

(i)  Authoritative  Teaching,  These  critics  do  not  rule 
out  the  use  of  all  documents,  of  course:  but  they  maintain 
that  before  any  documents  came  into  existence  the  general 
form  of  the  gospel  narrative  had  become  fixed  in  a  cycle  of 
authoritative  oral  teaching.  The  apostles  were  the  chief 
authorities  for  the  facts  of  the  life  of  Jesus  at  first.  They 
did  not  immediately  set  about  the  writing  of  books.  They 
did  begin  their  preaching  at  once,  and  in  the  beginning  they 
confined  themselves  largely  to  the  telling  of  the  historical 
facts  in  the  life  of  the  Redeemer.  As  they  went  from  place 
to  place  by  dint  of  repetition  the  order  of  the  narrative 
tended  to  become  fixed,  and  even  the  form  in  which  par- 
ticular incidents  were  repeated  would  gradually  establish 
itself  in  the  minds  and  on  the  tongues  of  both  the  hearers 
and  the  speakers.  At  the  same  time  slightly  different  forms 
of  reminiscence  might  go  back  to  different  apostles  for  their 
original  authority. 

(2)  Oriental  Memory.  In  addition  to  this  unquestioned 
fact  that  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  must  have  preceded  the 
writing  of  any  Gospels,  we  are  asked  to  remember  that  the 
Oriental  memory  was  trained  to  a  much  higher  degree  than 
we  are  apt  to  conceive  possible  here  in  the  West.  It  was 
the  habit  in  the  schools  of  the  rabbis  for  the  disciples  to 
retain  all  of  the  teaching  imparted  to  them  without  the  aid 
of  textbooks  or  notes.  They  were  expected  to  attend 
closely,  to  remember  fully,  and  to  repeat  accurately.  The 
traditions  were  handed  down  from  generation  to  generation 
in  that  way.  It  has  also  been  suggested  that  there  were 
catechetical  schools  among  the  Christians  from  the  very 
first,  and  that  systematic  instruction  was  imparted  to  all  con- 
verts in  such  schools.  It  is  stated  in  Luke's  preface  that 
Theophilus  had  been  instructed  in  this  catechetical  fashion.^^ 

^  Luke  I.  4,  itarjjx^ftjs. 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  291 

Paul  wrote  to  the  Galatians,  "Let  the  catechumen  in  respect 
to  the  word  share  with  the  one  catechizing  in  all  good 
things."  33  He  wrote  to  Timothy  to  give  double  honor  to 
those  elders  who  toiled  hard  in  the  word  and  in  teaching.^* 
It  was  their  duty  to  din  the  truth  into  the  ears  of  their 
pupils.  It  was  mechanical  and  disagreeable  work ;  but  their 
incessant  reiteration  insured  the  perfect  transmission  of  the 
tradition.  There  may  have  been  an  element  of  Rabbinical 
pedantry  in  it,  but  the  gospel  truths  and  facts  were  fixed  in 
form  and  in  memory  in  this  fashion.  If  there  were  several 
such  schools  and  a  slightly  different  tradition  were  preserved 
and  reproduced  in  each,  that  would  go  far  to  help  toward  the 
explanation  of  the  Synoptic  phenomena. 

(3)  Fragments  of  Writing.  Remembering  that  the 
preaching  of  the  apostles  was  largely  historical  in  the  begin- 
ning and  that  they  were  the  chief  authorities  for  the  account 
of  the  words  and  the  works  of  the  Lord,  and  remembering 
the  Oriental  retentiveness  of  memory  which  would  tend  to 
fix  the  form  not  only  of  the  story  as  told  but  as  repeated  by 
others,  we  have  the  basis  for  a  belief  that  a  particular  selec- 
tion of  incidents  and  sayings  and  a  particular  form  for  their 
presentation  would  establish  itself  in  Christian  circles  before 
any  one  would  attempt  to  put  any  of  these  things  into  writ- 
ing. Such  attempts  surely  would  be  made  in  time.  In  all 
probability  some  of  the  briefer  sayings  would  be  written 
first,  then  some  collection  of  these  sayings  would  be  made, 
then  some  account  of  the  miracles  would  be  committed  to 
writing,  then  the  longer  discourses,  then  the  eschatological 
prophecies.  These  fragments  would  then  be  united  by  some 
hand  or  by  several  hands  into  the  first  attempts  at  a  contin- 
uous sketch  of  the  life  of  Jesus.  The  best  of  these  would 
be  used  by  our  evangelists. 

The  parallels  in  the  Synoptics  would  thus  be  explained 
by  the  more  or  less  fluid  while  yet  more  or  less  fixed  form 

**  Gal.  6.  6,  i  «faTi7xoi5/t<wt   .   .   .  t<J5  KaTi)xouvTi. 
**  I.  Tim.  5.  17. 


292     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

of  the  primitive  oral  tradition,  and  the  minute  or  more  im- 
portant variations  would  be  explained  by  the  fact  that  the 
most  credible  witnesses  will  differ  more  or  less  in  giving 
the  account  of  the  same  matters,  and  the  best-trained  mem- 
ories will  be  imperfect  at  some  points,  while  at  the  same 
time,  having  made  due  allowance  for  the  differences  in  the 
oral  or  written  sources  of  information  open  to  each  evan- 
gelist, we  must  still  leave  room  for  his  personal  preferences 
and  tastes  in  the  selection  and  the  shaping  of  his  material. 
It  was  the  patent  superiority  of  our  Synoptic  Gospels  to  all 
of  their  predecessors  which  insured  their  preservation  and 
supremacy  in  the  church  while  their  models,  or  forerunners, 
perished. 

Stated  generally,  this  seems  like  a  very  satisfactory  theory 
of  the  composition  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  It  is  only  when 
we  come  to  the  application  of  it  in  detail  that  doubts  arise 
in  the  minds  of  many  scholars  as  to  whether  we  can  rely 
upon  it  as  an  adequate  hypothesis.  If  it  is  to  be  trusted  at 
all,  why  does  it  not  go  farther?  If  retentive  memories  ac- 
count for  much,  why  do  they  not  account  for  more?  If 
oral  tradition  be  supposed  to  fix  some  things,  why  did  it  not 
fix  others?  Stanton  concludes,  "The  relations  between  the 
first  three  Gospels  cannot  be  adequately  explained  simply 
by  the  influence  of  oral  tradition,"  ^s  and  Moffatt  affirms, 
"The  Gospels  are  books  made  out  of  books ;  none  of  them  is 
a  document  which  simply  transcribes  the  oral  teaching  of  an 
apostle  or  of  apostles.  Their  agreements  and  differences 
cannot  be  explained  except  on  the  hypothesis  of  a  more  or 
less  close  literary  relationship,  and  while  oral  tradition  is  a 
vera  causa,  it  is  only  a  subordinate  factor  in  the  evolution 
of  our  canonical  Greek  gospels."  ^e  The  present  generation 
of  critics  seems  to  be  swinging  away  from  any  rigid  adher- 
ence to  the  oral-tradition  theory  and  to  be  concluding  that 

*°  Stanton,  The  Gospels  as  Historical  Documents,  ii,  17. 
"Moffatt,  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  New  Testament, 
p.  180. 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  293 

the  more  hopeful  line  of  research  will  be  that  of  the  recon- 
struction of  original  documents.  Harnack  is  at  present  lead- 
ing the  way  in  this  direction. 

2.  Documentary  Sources.  Lessing  and  Eichhom  made  the 
first  investigation  into  the  Urkunden,  or  original  documents 
lying  back  of  our  Synoptic  Gospels.  Eichhorn  began  by 
positing  a  single  Urevangelium,  or  primitive  Gospel,  written 
in  Aramaic  about  the  time  of  the  stoning  of  Stephen;  but 
having  embarked  upon  the  high  seas  of  adventure  along 
this  line  he  kept  discovering  new  sources  until  the  very  pro- 
fusion and  wantonness  and  arbitrariness  of  his  inventions 
discredited  the  whole  performance.  He  made  a  great  sen- 
sation in  his  day,  even  more  than  Harnack  has  made  in  our 
day;  but  no  one  gives  much  heed  to  his  conjectures  now. 
Schleiermacher  suggested  the  Logia,  a  collection  of  the  say- 
ings of  Jesus,  and  a  series  of  more  or  less  extensive  compila- 
tions of  narratives,  leading  up  to  a  proto-Mark  and  then  to 
our  Synoptics.  Weisse  was  content  to  presuppose  the  Logia 
with  our  canonical  Mark  as  the  basis  of  the  other  two  Syn- 
optics. All  of  the  Tiibingen  school  were  disposed  to  beheve 
in  a  primitive  Aramaic  source  of  our  Gospels,  and  they 
usually  declared  that  our  Matthew  was  a  combination  of  a 
more  liberal  document  with  this  source,  and  Luke  was  a 
Pauline  protest  supplemented  from  Ebionite  sources,  and 
Mark  compiled  his  narrative  from  both  of  these.  The  gen- 
eral positions  of  the  Tiibingen  school  have  been  relegated  to 
the  theological  scrap-heap  by  this  time,  and  their  contribu- 
tions to  the  discussion  of  the  Synoptic  problem  carry  as  little 
weight  as  anything  they  said. 

We  will  put  down  in  a  single  paragraph  some  sample 
conclusions  of  some  modern  authorities  as  to  the  sources  of 
the  Synoptic  Gospels  and  the  order  of  their  composition. 
Holtzmann  believes  that  there  was  i.  A  proto-Mark,  the 
original  form  of  Mark's  Gospel.  2.  The  Logia,  a  collection 
of  the  sayings  of  Jesus.  3.  Our  canonical  Mark.  4.  Mat- 
thew.   5.  Luke.    He  thinks  that  the  last  two  were  founded 


294     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

upon  the  first  and  second,  and  used  additional  materials. 
Weiss  posits  the  order  as  follows,  i.  The  Logia.  2.  An 
original  Gospel  according  to  Matthew,  made  up  of  the  Logia 
and  added  incidents.  3.  Mark,  a  recollection  of  Peter's 
preaching  and  as  much  of  Matthew's  discourses  as  would 
harmonize  with  his  plans.  4.  Our  canonical  Matthew, 
founded  on  Mark  and  the  Logia.  5.  Luke,  founded  on 
Mark,  the  Logia,  and  other  sources.  Zahn  posits  i.  Mat- 
thew in  Hebrew.  2.  Mark.  3.  Luke.  4.  Matthew  in  Greek. 
Jiilicher  thinks  that  the  earliest  sources  were  our  Mark  and 
the  Logia  of  Matthew,  and  that  our  Matthew  and  Luke  use 
these  two  and  also  other  sources. 

Harnack  has  carried  his  researches  into  the  history  of  the 
early  church  back  into  the  time  of  the  composition  of  the 
Gospels,  and  he  has  chosen  to  use  the  term  Quelle  or  its 
abbreviation  Q  instead  of  the  old  term  Logia:  and  he  thinks 
that  Mark  and  Q  are  the  two,  and  the  only  two,  common 
sources  for  Matthew  and  Luke.  He  has  undertaken  to  re- 
construct Q  with  genuine  German  thoroughness  and  the 
usual  German  subjective  arbitrariness.  James  Hope  Moul- 
ton  and  Benjamin  Wisner  Bacon  and  Willoughby  C.  Allen 
have  shown  good  reasons  why  we  should  hesitate  to  accept 
without  question  his  conclusions  along  this  line.  Well- 
hausen  and  Weiss  have  offered  pertinent  objections  to 
Harnack's  generalizations,  and  have  gone  into  still  more 
minute  and  even  microscopic  investigation  of  supposable 
sources.  The  dominant  interest  at  present  seems  to  lie  in 
work  along  these  lines.  In  our  judgment  the  farther  it  is 
carried  the  less  confidence  it  will  command  in  both  the 
expert  and  the  lay  mind. 

Vn.  Conclusions 

What  may  we  conclude  on  the  basis  of  the  facts  now  pre- 
sented? I.  The  Synoptic  Problem  is  not  much  nearer  a 
solution  to-day  than  it  has  been  at  any  previous  time  in  the 
history  of  the  church.    We  have  more  facts  in  hand  than 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  295 

scholarship  has  been  able  to  accumulate  before  this  gen- 
eration ;  but  these  facts  only  serve  to  increase  the  intricacies 
of  the  problem  and  they  do  not  seem  to  insure  any  greater 
unanimity  of  conclusion  on  the  part  of  the  scholarly  world. 
Without  some  added  discoveries  of  documents  in  Egypt  or 
elsewhere,  a  rather  remote  possibility,  there  is  little  or  no 
reason  to  think  that  any  sufficient  solution  of  the  Synoptic 
Problem  is  possible.  In  details  the  history  of  the  composi- 
tion of  our  Synoptic  Gospels  will  remain  a  mystery  for  all 
time  to  come. 

The  facts  which  would  be  adequate  to  our  need  at  this 
point  are  lost  in  the  dim  mazes  of  antiquity  and  in  all  prob- 
ability they  are  lost  forever.  Zahn  is  well  within  the  truth 
when  he  says,  "Up  to  the  present  time  no  one  of  the  investi- 
gations of  the  Synoptic  Problem  can  be  said  to  have  produced 
results  which  have  been  generally  accepted,  or  that  can  lay 
well-grounded  claims  to  such  acceptance.  In  one  point  only 
is  there  agreement,  namely,  that  it  is  impossible  to  set  forth 
the  history  of  the  origin  of  the  first  three  Gospels  in  a  satis- 
factory manner  on  the  basis  of  reliable  reports  and  trust- 
worthy observations ;  that,  rather,  gaps  remain  in  our  knowl- 
edge based  upon  these  two  classes  of  data,  which  must  be 
filled  up  by  conjecture."  ^7 

However,  there  are  some  general  conclusions  upon  which 
a  majority  of  the  critics  may  now  be  said  to  agree.  Henry 
Latimer  Jackson  in  his  survey  of  criticism  in  this  field  sums 
up  his  discussion  rather  hopefully.  He  says,  "The  present 
state  of  the  Synoptic  Problem  has  been  described  as  chaotic. 
To  a  certain  extent  the  description  must  be  allowed ;  where 
points  of  controversy  are  many  and  conflict  of  opinion  is 
sharply  illustrated,  it  might  indeed  seem  that  the  utmost 
confusion  reigns  in  what  is  spoken  of  as  the  fundamental 
problem  of  New  Testament  criticism,  and  consequently  of 
Christian  origins.    There  is  nevertheless  some  warrant  for 


"  Zahn,  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  vol.  ii,  p.  418. 


296     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

stating  the  position  in  more  hopeful  terms ;  if  inexact  knowl- 
edge of  the  situation  finds  much  to  suggest  utter  chaos, 
experts  will  allow  that  in  spite  of  goings  after  side  issues, 
modern  scientific  research  has  been  steadily  approximat- 
ing to  an  agreement  in  regard  to  main  points.  It  is  after 
all  possible  to  report  progress.^^  .  .  .  The  probability  is 
that  absolute  certainty  on  every  point  will  never  be  at- 
tained. But  there  are  signs  of  an  advance;  the  goal  is 
in  clearer  view."  ^^ 

2.  The  oral  hypothesis  has  much  truth  in  it.  Oral  nar- 
ratives came  first  in  order,  and  they  would  have  a  tendency 
to  take  a  fixed  form.  However,  this  hypothesis  alone  never 
can  give  more  than  general  help  in  the  consideration  of 
the  problem.  It  fails  in  adequacy  whenever  we  try  to  apply 
it  to  the  minute  details  of  variations  in  the  Synoptics.  In 
the  Encyclopaedia  Biblica  Schmiedel  brands  it  as  an  asylum 
ignor antics  and  an  asylum  orthodoxies ,  and  his  feeling  is 
shared  by  most  students  of  the  subject  to-day.  The  facts 
must  be  faced,  and  the  facts  point  to  written  sources  as  well 
as  an  oral  tradition. 

3.  If  we  feel  ourselves  forced  to  assume  that  written  docu- 
ments lie  behind  our  canonical  Gospels,  and  either  that  any 
of  them  borrowed  from  others  or  that  they  borrowed  from 
any  common  sources,  we  still  must  face  the  facts.  They 
seem  to  compel  us  to  the  conclusion  that  our  Synoptists  felt 
free  to  add  to  or  omit  from  or  transpose  or  otherwise 
change  their  sources  as  they  thought  best.  If  this  seem  to 
any  one  to  be  irreverent  or  impossible  we  simply  appeal  to 
the  facts.  The  phenomena  point  to  written  sources.  Yet 
the  Synoptists  give  us  different  genealogies  of  Jesus,  differ- 
ent forms  for  the  so-called  Lord's  Prayer,  different  accounts 
of  the  institution  of  the  Lord's  supper,  different  forms  of 
the  inscription  on  the  cross,  and  different  reports  of  the 
same  discourses.    How  far  these  differences  are  due  to  dif- 

^  Cambridge  Biblical  Essays,  p.  454. 
*'  Op.  ciU,  p.  456. 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  297 

ferent  documents  or  to  individual  preferences  in  dealing  with 
the  same  document  who  will  be  able  to  decide  for  us  ? 

4.  The  Gospel  according  to  Mark  probably  is  the  oldest  of 
the  Synoptists.  Allen  calls  this  "the  one  solid  result  of 
literary  criticism."  Both  Matthew  and  Luke  may  have  made 
use  of  Mark  in  the  composition  of  their  Gospels.  Alford, 
Plumptre,  SchafT,  and  Westcott  are  convinced  that  neither 
Matthew  nor  Luke  has  done  this.  These  are  good  author- 
ities, but  present  criticism  has  declared  against  them  at  this 
point.  Patton  says  that  "the  one  universally  accepted  result 
of  modern  study  of  the  synoptic  problem  is  the  dependence 
of  Matthew  and  Luke  upon  the  Gospel  of  Mark."  ^^  if 
we  grant  this,  let  us  suppose  for  a  moment  that  our  canon- 
ical Mark  had  not  been  preserved  to  our  time  and  that 
nevertheless  ninety-three  per  cent  of  its  contents  had  been 
incorporated  with  our  canonical  Matthew  and  Luke  and 
that  modern  critics  had  decided  that  Matthew  and  Luke 
must  have  had  a  common  source  from  which  they  had  drawn 
this  common  material  and  some  of  the  more  adventurous 
among  them  had  undertaken  to  reconstruct  Mark  out  of 
Matthew  and  Luke,  what  degree  of  success  could  we  ex- 
pect to  attend  their  efforts  ?  They  might  attain  to  some  gen- 
eral approximation  to  the  appearance  of  our  canonical  Mark, 
but  in  multitudes  of  details  their  conjectures  would  differ 
with  each  other :  and  that  any  one  of  them  would  reproduce 
our  Mark  as  it  really  is,  with  perfect  exactness  of  chro- 
nology and  phraseology,  would  be  beyond  the  wildest  reaches 
of  possibility.  Yet  Harnack  and  others  have  attempted  a 
somewhat  similar  task  in  the  reconstruction  of  Q ;  and  what- 
ever conclusions  they  may  publish  to  the  world  will  be  in- 
teresting and  instructive  and  unsatisfactory.  Q  in  its  en- 
tirety will  no  more  be  attainable  by  any  critic  among  us  than 
Mark  would  have  been  under  the  suppositions  we  have 
suggested. 

Archdeacon  Allen  puts  the  patent  truth  of  the  case  very 

*°  Patton,  Sources  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  p.  3. 


298     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

pertinently  when  he  says,  "Consider  what  would  happen 
upon  this  method  of  putting  into  the  reconstruction  of  Mark 
all  that  was  common  to  the  other  Synoptic  Gospels.  In  the 
first  place,  the  critics'  Mark  would  be  much  larger  than  the 
real  Mark.  It  would  contain  a  large  part,  e.  g.,  of  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount.  Secondly,  it  would  not  contain  much 
that  is  in  our  Mark.  The  whole  of  Mark  6.  45  to  8.  26, 
e.  g.,  would  not  be  found  in  it.  Thirdly,  almost  all  the  char- 
acteristics of  the  real  Mark  would  be  absent  from  it.  The 
vivid  and  picturesque  details,  the  emphasis  upon  the  throng- 
ing crowd,  the  remarkable  use  of  tenses,  the  rare  words,  the 
emphasis  upon  the  human  affections  and  gestures  of  the 
Lord,  and  upon  the  strife  and  ignorance  of  the  Apostles — 
all  these  would  not  be  entirely  absent,  but  would  be  a  negli- 
gible element  in  the  Mark  of  the  critics.  ...  I  am 
sometimes  inclined  to  think  that  the  Q  of  the  critics  is  due 
to  the  feeling  that  we  must  have  some  result  of  much  in- 
vestigation even  though  it  be  obtained  by  precarious  meth- 
ods. For  there  is  much  to  make  it  probable  that  any  attempt 
to  recover  a  lost  source  used  in  the  first  and  third  Gospels  is 
a  profitless  quest."  ^^ 

5.  There  may  have  been  an  original  collection  of  the  Say- 
ings of  Jesus,  the  so-called  Logia,  and  it  may  have  been 
extant  both  in  an  Aramaic  form  and  in  a  Greek  translation. 
Then  if  one  or  both  of  these  versions  were  used  by  our  Syn- 
optists  the  two  versions  would  help  to  account  for  some  of 
the  verbal  identities  and  some  of  the  variations  of  trans- 
lation. The  exact  form  and  extent  and  content  of  this 
original  Quelle  or  Source  will  be  open  to  conjecture  and 
never  can  be  assured  with  our  present  sources  of  informa- 
tion. 

6.  There  may  have  been  and  there  probably  were  many 
fragments  of  material  used  by  our  Synoptists,  the  exact 
number  and  nature  of  which  no  man  can  determine  for  us 
now. 

**  The  Interpreter,  vol.  x,  pp.  376,  Z77' 


THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM  299 

7.  Mark  may  have  known  and  used  the  Logia  or  Q. 

8.  Matthew  probably  did  not  know  or  use  the  Gospel 
written  by  Luke,  and  Luke  probably  did  not  know  or  use  our 
canonical  Matthew. 

9.  In  our  Synoptic  Gospels  we  have  no  literally  iner- 
rant  or  infallible  record  either  of  the  teachings  or  the  doings 
of  Jesus.  They  do  give  us  a  substantially  accurate  and 
sufficient  account  of  these  things.  Their  purpose  was  prac- 
tical rather  than  pedantic.  It  was  reHgious  rather  than 
rigidly  historical.  They  did  not  carefully  copy  texts.  They 
were  not  particular  about  minute  details.  They  intended  to 
give,  and  they  did  give,  a  faithful  and  serviceable  picture  of 
the  man  Jesus,  his  words  and  his  works.  In  all  the  great 
essentials  of  the  narrative  they  agree.  The  personality  they 
set  forth  is  the  same  and  is  unmistakable  in  each  of  their 
books.  They  were  not  punctilious  about  little  matters  of 
time  and  place.  They  possibly  had  no  ideal  in  their  thought 
of  verbal  accuracy.  They  did  have  the  Ideal  Personality  in 
mind  and  they  sought  to  interpret  that  personality  to  their 
generation  with  all  the  aids  they  could  summon,  and  their 
success  was  such  that  it  drove  all  competitors  from  the  field 
and  it  has  satisfied  the  religious  needs  of  the  world  from 
their  day  to  our  own. 

We  have  a  fourth  Gospel,  and  we  are  thankful  that  it  is 
so  different  from  the  Synoptists  that  it  may  be  considered  a 
wholly  independent  attempt  at  the  portraiture  of  the  Per- 
sonality of  Jesus,  and  it  suggests  how  inexhaustible  that 
personality  was  and  what  different  impressions  it  must  have 
made  on  dilTerent  men.  We  are  thankful  for  all  the  differ- 
ences there  are  in  the  Synoptists,  as  bearing  testimony  to 
this  same  multiform  impressiveness.  We  are  thankful  to 
believe  that  the  substantial  historicity  of  the  Synoptic  nar- 
ratives has  been  established  by  all  recent  research  and  that 
it  has  approved  itself  through  all  the  Christian  centuries. 


PART  V 
THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS 


PART  V 
THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS 

I.  Name  of  the  Book 

I.  The  Acts  of  Peter  and  Paul.  The  fifth  book  of  the 
New  Testament  is  entitled  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  in  the 
Vaticanus  and  most  of  the  uncial  manuscripts,  and  the  book 
is  cited  by  this  name  in  Irenaeus,  TertuUian,  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  the  Muratorian  Fragment,  and  many  ancient 
authorities;  but  in  quotations  by  Origen,  the  most  learned 
of  the  church  Fathers,  and  in  the  superscription  of  the  Si- 
naiticus,  we  find  the  abridged  title,  The  Acts.  This  is  a  better 
title,  for  Luke's  second  volume  does  not  appear  upon  exam- 
ination to  be  a  history  of  the  twelve  apostles.  They  are 
mentioned  and  enumerated  in  the  first  chapter,^  but  the 
after  history  wholly  ignores  most  of  them,  and  only  meager 
mention  is  made  of  any  of  them,  except  Peter,  James,  and 
John. 

We  have  the  account  of  James's  martyrdom,^  and  John 
is  mentioned  on  two  occasions  as  the  companion  of  Peter,^ 
but  he  still  occupies  the  silent  and  subordinate  position 
which  the  Gospels  had  given  him.  More  prominence  in  the 
narrative  is  given  to  Stephen  the  martyr  and  Philip  the 
evangelist,  both  of  them  deacons  in  the  Jerusalem  church, 
and  to  Barnabas  and  Silas  and  Paul,  all  of  them  mission- 
aries beyond  the  borders  of  Palestine,  than  to  any  member 
of  the  apostolic  company,  except  Peter,  the  organizer, 
originator,   spokesman,   and   head.     Peter   is  the   hero  of 

'  Acts  I.  13,  26. 

•Acts  12.  2. 

•Acts  3.  1-12;  8.  14. 

303 


304     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

the  former  half  of  the  history,  as  Paul  is  the  hero  of  the 
latter  half,  and  the  book  might  be  named  with  more  ac- 
curacy The  Acts  of  Peter  and  Paul.  From  this  point  of 
view  there  are  two  clearly  distinguishable  sections  of  the 
book.  The  Doings  of  Peter  are  recorded  in  the  first  twelve 
chapters,  and  The  Missions  and  Sufferings  of  Paul  are 
narrated  in  the  remaining  chapters  of  the  history.  The 
whole  history  of  the  church  is  shown  to  revolve  about  these 
two  men.  As  in  the  Apocalypse  John  had  the  vision  of  the 
two  prophets  and  witnesses  who  were  the  two  olive  trees  and 
the  two  candlesticks,  standing  before  the  Lord  of  the  earth,* 
so  in  the  Book  of  the  Acts  of  Peter  and  Paul  we  are  shown 
how  the  Christian  Church  was  founded  by  these  two  apostles 
who  furnished  the  inspiration  and  the  illumination  of  leader- 
ship necessary  to  make  it  a  power  among  men.  These  were 
the  two  anointed  ones  chosen  in  the  beginning  to  stand  for 
the  Lord  before  the  whole  earth.^ 

2.  The  Acts  of  the  Ascended  Lord.  This  is  the  second 
volume  of  Luke's  Church  History.  In  the  first  volume, 
The  Gospel  according  to  Luke,  he  tells  us  that  he  had  nar- 
rated "all  that  Jesus  began  both  to  do  and  to  teach."  ^  In 
this  second  volume  he  narrates  all  that  Jesus  continues  both 
to  do  and  to  teach.  The  ascended  Christ  is  not  separated 
either  in  sympathy  or  presence  from  his  church.  He  is  at 
hand  in  all  the  crises  of  its  history.  He  is  active  continu- 
ously in  the  midst  of  it.  From  the  Father's  presence  he 
sends  forth  the  Pentecostal  baptism  which  is  the  church's 
needed  enduement  of  power.'^  When  the  lame  man  was 
walking  and  leaping  and  praising  God  there  at  the  Beautiful 
Gate  of  the  temple,  Peter  declared  to  the  multitude  that  this 
first  miracle  after  Pentecost  was  wrought  in  the  name 
and  by  the  power  of  the  still  Uving  and  ascended  Lord.^ 
Stephen  saw  him  standing  at  the  Father's  right  hand,  ready 

*Rev.  II.  3,  4.  ^Acts  2.  32,  23- 

''Zech.  4.  14.  *Acts  3.  16. 

•Acts  I.  I. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  305 

to  welcome  the  first  martyr  home.^  On  the  road  to  Damas- 
cus he  appeared  to  Saul  and  in  personal  conversation  he 
called  the  "chosen  vessel"  to  his  unique  career. ^*^  He  talked 
with  Peter  on  the  housetop  at  Joppa  and  prepared  him  for 
the  reception  of  the  first  Gentile  convert  into  the  no  longer 
exclusively  Jewish  but  now  universal  church. ^^ 

It  was  the  Lord  from  heaven  who  opened  Lydia's  heart 
to  give  heed  to  the  things  which  were  spoken  by  Paul.^^ 
When  troubles  were  multiplied  in  Corinth  and  there  was  so 
much  to  discourage  and  alarm,  the  Lord  spoke  to  Paul  in  a 
night  vision  and  said  to  him,  "Be  not  afraid  .  .  .  ;  for 
I  am  with  thee,  and  no  man  shall  set  on  thee  to  harm 
thee."  ^3  The  ascended  Lord  always  is  present  with  his 
own,  and  he  gives  them  divine  guidance  and  blessing  in 
every  time  of  special  need.^^  It  was  he  who  sent  Paul  and 
his  helpers  westward  into  the  newer  continent  and  along 
the  zone  of  power.  All  their  spiritual  life  and  strength  were 
derived  from  their  living  Lord.  All  the  miracle-working 
power  these  early  Christians  possessed  was  from  him,  gra- 
ciously given  or  at  times  sovereignly  withheld. ^^  He  was 
the  center  and  soul  of  all  their  teaching  and  preaching,  the 
omnipotent  Source  of  all  their  success  in  evangelism. ^^ 
The  unseen  presence  and  power  of  the  ascended  Lord  was 
the  secret,  the  all-suflficient  explanation,  of  the  church's 
marvelous  growth  from  Jerusalem  to  the  uttermost  parts  of 
the  earth.  The  deeds  of  the  Lord  recorded  in  the  Gospels 
were  only  a  beginning  of  his  work  in  and  for  his  church. 
Luke's  second  volume  gives  the  continuation  of  these  deeds, 


•Acts  7.  55,  56. 

"Acts  9.  3-6. 

"Acts  10.  13-16. 

"Acts  16.  14. 

"Acts  18.  9- 

"Acts  16.  6,  7,  10. 

"Acts  3.  6,  16;  9.  34. 

"Acts  2.  32-36;  5.  42;  8.  5;  10.  36-43;  16.  31 ;  26.  22,  23. 


3o6     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

and  it  might  be  named  The  Acts  of  the  Glorified  Jesus,  or 
The  Acts  of  the  Ascended  Lord. 

It  was  Christmas  Evans  who  said,  "Most  reformations 
die  with  their  reformers;  but  this  Reformer  ever  lives  to 
carry  on  his  reformation."  That  is  one  chief  lesson  of  the 
book  of  Acts.  Those  first  apostles  and  evangehsts  were 
worshiping  no  dead  Jew.  They  worshiped  and  preached 
a  living  Lord.  They  believed  that  he  was  active  in  the  midst 
of  his  people  still.  The  stress  of  their  gospel  proclamation 
always  fell  upon  the  resurrection.  It  was  their  faith  in  the 
resurrected  and  ascended  Lord  which  gave  them  hope  and 
insured  them  victory.  If  their  leader  had  been  dead,  their 
cause  would  have  been  lost.  He  was  alive,  and  he  was 
with  them  for  evermore. 

3.  The  Acts  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  No  writer  in  the  New 
Testament  emphasizes  the  personality  of  the  Holy  Spirit  as 
Luke  does.  In  the  Gospels,  when  Matthew  says,  "If  ye 
then,  being  evil,  know  how  to  give  good  gifts  unto  your 
children,  how  much  more  shall  your  Father  who  is  in  heaven 
give  good  things  to  them  who  ask  him,"  ^'^  Luke  prefers  to 
summarize  all  other  good  gifts  in  the  greatest  gift  of  God 
to  man,  and  he  says,  "Your  heavenly  Father"  will  "give 
the  Holy  Spirit  to  those  who  ask  him."  ^^  The  Holy  Spirit 
is  the  best  of  all  "good  things"  in  Luke's  estimation;  and 
his  second  volume  is  a  prolonged  proof  of  the  justification 
of  this  standpoint.  We  never  would  have  known  about  the 
baptism  at  Pentecost,  if  Luke  had  not  written  this  history; 
for  no  other  book  in  the  New  Testament  makes  mention 
of  it.  That  baptism  with  the  Spirit  marked  the  beginning 
of  the  new  dispensation,  a  dispensation  which  has  had  no 
end  as  yet.  The  history  of  the  Christian  Church  began  there 
at  Pentecost,  for  the  Christian  Church  is  the  church  filled 
with  the  Spirit  of  God.  Peter  preached  to  those  who  were 
under  conviction  that  day  that  remission  of  sins  and  the 

''Matt.  7.  II. 
^Luke  II.  13. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  307 

reception  of  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  were  the  two  things 
necessary  to  admission  into  the  Christian  fellowship,  which 
was  to  be  a  holy  fellowship  in  the  common  possession  of 
the  Spirit  of  God.i» 

This  mighty  personality,  the  Holy  Spirit,  made  so 
prominent  in  the  beginning  of  the  book,  continues  to  be  the 
efficient  and  sufficient  Comforter,  Illuminator,  and  Enduer 
with  power  to  the  very  close.  The  church  claimed  that  he 
presided  in  their  councils  and  their  conclusions  were  pub- 
lished in  his  name.  They  said,  "It  seemed  good  to  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  to  us."  20  it  was  the  Holy  Spirit  who  said, 
"Separate  me  Barnabas  and  Saul  for  the  work  whereunto 
I  have  called  them,"  21  and  they  went  out  to  their  mission- 
ary career,  "being  sent  forth  by  the  Holy  Spirit."  ^^  Paul 
said  to  the  elders  of  Ephesus,  "Take  heed  unto  yourselves, 
and  to  all  the  flock,  in  which  the  Holy  Spirit  hath  made  you 
bishops."  23  It  was  by  the  authority  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
that  the  affairs  of  the  church  were  administered.  It  was  he 
who  chose  their  ministers  and  guided  them  into  the  truth. 

Stephen  was  a  man  full  of  faith  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  the  disputers  could  not  withstand  the  wisdom  and  the 
Spirit  by  which  he  spake. 2^  The  Lord  sent  Ananias  to 
Saul  that  he  might  receive  his  sight  and  that  he  might  be 
filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit.^s  Barnabas  was  a  good  man, 
full  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  of  faith,  and  that  made  him  a 
most  successful  evangelist.^^  The  Holy  Spirit  fell  upon  the 
twelve  at  Ephesus  and  they  spake  with  tongues  and  proph- 
esied even  as  the  one  hundred  and  twenty  had  at  Pente- 
cost.2''  We  read  that  the  church  throughout  all  Judaea  and 
Galilee  and  Samaria  had  peace,  and,  walking  in  the  fear 
of  the  Lord  and  in  the  comfort  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  was 

"Acts  2.  38.  "Acts  6.  5,  10. 

"Acts  15.  28,  "Acts  9.  17. 

"Acts  13.  2.  "Acts  II.  24. 

**Acts  13.  4.  *'Acts  19.  6. 
"Acts  20.  28. 


3o8     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

multiplied. 28  Peter  told  Cornelius  how  God  had  anointed 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  with  the  Holy  Spirit  and  with  power,^^ 
and  this  book  makes  it  clear  that  all  the  disciples  of  Jesus 
were  expected  to  be  like  their  Master  at  this  point.  They 
were  to  be  men  of  good  report,  full  of  the  Spirit  and  of 
wisdom.30 

Each  of  the  three  great  forward  movements  in  the  history 
of  the  church  in  this  book  is  marked  by  a  notable  outpour- 
ing of  the  Holy  Spirit.  At  Pentecost  they  were  all  filled 
v/  with  the  Holy  Spirit.^^  In  Samaria  Peter  and  John  laid 
their  hands  upon  the  converts  and  they  received  the  Holy 
Spirit.^  2  At  Caesarea  Peter  preached  to  Cornelius  and  his 
household,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  fell  on  all  them  that  heard 
the  word.^^  The  disciples  had  been  commanded  to  preach  to 
Jews  and  Samaritans  and  Gentiles,  and  as  they  obeyed  the 
command  the  Holy  Spirit  gave  them  the  sanction  of  his  out- 
pouring of  power.  No  book  in  the  Bible  mentions  the  Holy 
Spirit  as  often  as  this  book.  There  are  fifty-seven  direct 
references  to  his  manifest  presence;  and  if  we  include  allu- 
sions, he  is  mentioned  some  seventy-one  times.  The  book 
could  well  be  named  The  Acts  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

4.  The  Acts  of  the  Missionary  Church.  This  book  has  been 
the  missionary  manual  of  the  Christian  centuries.  Its  motto 
is  found  in  the  eighth  verse  of  the  first  chapter,  "Ye  shall 
receive  power,  when  the  Holy  Spirit  is  come  upon  you: 
and  ye  shall  be  my  witnesses  both  in  Jerusalem,  and  in  all 
Judaea  and  Samaria,  and  unto  the  uttermost  part  of  the 
earth."  The  narrative  enlarges  upon  this  theme.  In  chap- 
ters I  to  8  the  church  is  estabhshed  in  Jerusalem.  In 
chapters  8  and  9  the  gospel  is  preached  in  Judaea  and 
Samaria.  In  chapters  10  to  28  the  message  is  carried  to  the 
ends  of  the  earth.  The  founding  of  the  local  church,  home 
missions  and  foreign  missions  follow  in  rapid  and  legitimate 

''Acts  9.  31.  ''Acts  2.  4. 

^  Acts  10.  38.  "'  Acts  8.  17. 

'"Acts  6.  3.  ''Acts  10.  44. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  309 

succession.  The  three  successive  centers  of  this  activity, 
marking  the  beginning,  middle,  and  consummation  of  it,  are 
Jerusalem,  Antioch,  Rome. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  order  of  the  synoptic 
Gospels  in  our  Bibles  and  the  course  of  events  in  this  book 
parallel  each  other.  First,  we  have  the  Gospel  according  to 
Matthew,  which  is  the  Gospel  for  the  Jews;  and  then  the 
Gospel  according  to  Mark,  which  is  the  Gospel  for  the 
Romans;  and  then  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke,  which  is 
the  Gospel  for  the  Greeks.  So  in  the  book  of  Acts  we  find 
that  the  gospel  is  preached  first  in  Jerusalem  and  Judaea  to 
the  Jews,  and  then  at  Caesarea  to  Cornelius  the  Roman  cen- 
turion, and  then  through  Asia  Minor  and  Macedonia  and 
Achaia  to  the  Greeks.  We  learn  how  Jews  and  Romans  and 
Greeks  were  won  to  the  faith,  and  the  success  of  the  early 
evangelists  has  been  a  stimulus  to  the  church  ever  since.  The 
book  of  Acts  has  furnished  more  inspiration  to  missionary 
effort  at  home  and  abroad  than  any  other  volume  in  the  liter- 
ature of  the  faith.  It  has  shown  what  can  be  accomplished 
and  also  the  best  methods  of  accomplishment.  Zockler  has 
well  said,  "We  have  to  thank  the  book  of  Acts  that  the  mis- 
sionary methods  and  results  of  these  disciples,  especially  of 
Peter  and  Paul,  are  known  to  us  more  fully  and  exactly  than 
the  history  of  all  the  next-following  heroes  of  the  Christian 
missionary  movement  till  we  come  to  Columba  and  Gallus, 
Wilfrid  and  Willibrod."  ^^  The  book  which  gives  us  this 
information  and  this  inspiration  might  be  called  The  Acts 
of  the  Missionary  Church.  The  first  half  of  the  book  has 
to  do  with  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  the  church  of  the  twelve 
apostles,  the  church  of  the  circumcision.  The  second  half 
of  the  book  has  to  do  with  the  church  of  the  empire,  the 
church  of  the  uncircumcision.  Both  were  missionary 
churches.  The  active  and  aggressive  church  always  is  a 
missionary  church. 

5.  The  Acts  of  the  Methodist  Church.    Luke  introduces 

•*  Strack-Zockler  Kommentar,  S.  146. 


310     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

a  very  peculiar  term  for  the  Christian  faith  in  this  narrative. 
He  calls  it  V  o66g,  The  Way.^°  That  name  had  the  sug- 
gestion of  ceaseless  motion  in  it.  The  Christianity  of  the 
beginning  history  of  the  church  never  was  at  rest.  It  was 
on  the  road,  on  The  Way  to  wider  influence  and  to  better 
things.  On  foot,  on  horseback,  on  camel-back,  on  shipboard, 
it  always  was  on  the  go.  It  was  persistently  itinerant,  al- 
ways pressing  forward  to  some  farther  goal.  Then  the 
Christians  had  a  Way  of  doing  things  which  was  an  entirely 
new  way  to  the  world  of  that  day.  It  was  a  new  Way  of 
thought,  a  new  Way  of  speech,  a  new  Way  of  life.  The 
Christians  were  called  "those  who  belong  to  The  Way." 
Christianity  did  not  seem  to  the  unbelievers  to  be  a  creed, 
a  philosophy,  a  society,  a  nationality,  so  much  as  it  was  a 
Way  of  thinking,  speaking,  acting.  A  Christian  was  known 
by  the  Way  he  had  of  looking  at  life,  its  duties  and  responsi- 
bihties.  His  methods  won  the  right  of  way  through  the 
heathen  world.  This  new  power  in  the  world,  a  Methodist 
Church,  won  adherents  everywhere.  The  book  which 
records  its  triumphs  might  be  named  The  Acts  of  the  Meth- 
odist Church. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  name  "Methodist"  was  first  a 
nickname,  applied  in  derision  to  the  members  of  the  Holy 
Club  there  at  Oxford  "because  they  observed  a  more  regu- 
lar method  of  study  and  behavior  than  was  usual  with  those 
of  their  age  and  station."  John  Wesley  did  not  appreciate 
the  name  very  highly  in  the  beginning.  He  wished  that  it 
"might  never  be  mentioned  more,  but  be  buried  in  eternal 
oblivion."  Contrary  to  his  desire,  the  name  survived  and 
became  the  general  and  popular  designation  for  the  members 
of  his  societies;  and  in  1752  John  Wesley  published  a  dic- 
tionary in  which  this  definition  appeared,  "A  Methodist  is 
one  who  lives  according  to  the  method  laid  down  in  the 
Bible."  That  was  true  of  the  early  Christians.  They  lived 
according  to  the  method  laid  down  in  the  Bible  of  their 

**Acts  9.  2;  18.  25;  19.  9,  23;  22.  4;  24.  14,  22. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  311 

day,  and  according  to  the  commandment  of  the  Lord  and 
his  apostles.  This  way  or  method  came  to  characterize 
them,  and  they  were  called  the  "methodists,"  "those  who 
belong  to  the  method  or  way."  Their  acts  then  are  the 
acts  of  the  Methodist  Church.  The  name  would  seem  to  be 
applied  to  them  just  as  properly  as  it  ever  was  to  the  fol- 
lowers of  John  Wesley.  In  his  Journal  for  January  5,  1761, 
John  Wesley  wrote,  "We  aver  that  Methodism  is  the  one 
old  religion ;  as  old  as  the  Reformation,  as  old  as  Christian- 
ity, as  old  as  Moses,  as  old  as  Adam."  He  at  least  would 
have  claimed  kinship  with  those  who  were  "of  the  Way"  in 
the  book  of  Acts. 

II.  Importance  of  the  Book 

I.  As  a  Church  History.  This  book  is  invaluable  because 
it  gives  us  our  only  trustworthy  account  of  the  origin  of 
Christianity  as  an  organized  world-force.  Philip  Schaflf 
has  said:  "Examine  and  compare  the  secular  historians 
from  Herodotus  to  Macaulay,  and  the  church  historians 
from  Eusebius  to  Neander,  and  Luke  need  not  fear  a  com- 
parison. No  history  of  thirty  years  has  ever  been  written 
so  truthful  and  impartial,  so  important  and  interesting,  so 
healthy  in  tone  and  hopeful  in  spirit,  so  aggressive  and  yet 
so  genial,  so  cheering  and  inspiring,  so  replete  with  lessons 
of  wisdom  and  encouragement  for  work  in  spreading  the 
gospel  of  truth  and  peace,  and  yet  withal  so  simple  and 
modest,  as  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  It  is  the  best  as  well  as 
the  first  manual  of  church  history."  ^s  No  other  book  ever 
could  take  its  place.  If  the  curtain  had  been  drawn  upon 
the  crucifixion  of  Jesus  and  lifted  again  only  after  the  death 
of  Paul,  we  never  could  have  understood  how  the  Chris- 
tian faith  had  burst  its  Jewish  bonds  and  taken  its  flight 
over  all  the  Mediterranean  lands  and  established  itself  as 
the  inevitable  conqueror  of  all  the  modern  world.    Nothing 

"'  Schaff,  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  vol.  i,  p.  739. 


312     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

seemed  more  unlikely  at  the  close  of  the  Gospel  history. 
Even  as  we  look  back  upon  the  accomplished  reality  it  seems 
little  short  of  miraculous  in  our  eyes.  In  the  book  of  Acts 
Luke  has  given  us  the  secret  of  this  mystery  in  a  plain  and 
clear  narration  of  the  simple  and  marvelous  history. 

Dean  Farrar  suggests  that  "the  preciousness  of  a  book 
may  sometimes  best  be  estimated  if  we  consider  the  loss 
which  we  should  experience  if  we  did  not  possess  it.  If  so, 
we  can  hardly  value  too  highly  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 
Had  it  not  come  down  to  us,  there  would  have  been  a  blank 
in  our  knowledge  which  scarcely  anything  could  have  filled 
up.  The  origin  of  Christianity  would  have  been  an  insoluble 
enigma.  We  should  have  possessed  no  materials  out  of 
which  it  could  be  constructed,  except,  on  the  one  hand,  a 
few  scattered  remnants  of  ecclesiastical  tradition,  and  on 
the  other  hand  shameless  misrepresentations,  like  the 
pseudo-Clementine  forgeries."  ^'^  Therefore,  he  concludes, 
"We  have  in  the  Acts  a  picture  of  the  origins  of  Chris- 
tianity drawn  by  one  who  was  himself  a  leading  actor  in  the 
early  evangelization  of  the  world.  Quiet,  retiring,  unob- 
trusive, the  beloved  physician  has  yet  so  used  for  us  his 
sacred  gifts  of  calm  observation,  of  clear  expression,  of 
large-hearted  catholicity,  of  intelligent  research,  that  he  has 
won  for  himself  a  conspicuous  place  among  the  benefactors 
of  mankind."  ^^ 

As  the  first  church  history  and  as  the  only  history  of  the 
early  church  which  can  make  any  claim  to  be  authentic,  this 
book  is  invaluable  to  the  student  of  church  organization 
and  discipline.  It  is  the  book  of  Genesis  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment church.  In  it  we  have  the  beginnings  of  things.  It 
gives  us  the  account  of  the  first  apostolic  sermon  and  of 
the  first  apostoHc  miracle.  We  find  in  it  the  beginnings  of 
ecclesiastical  organization.  We  read  here  of  the  first  perse- 
cution and  the  first  martyr  and  the  first  Gentile  convert. 

^'  Farrar,  Messages  of  the  Books,  p.  121. 
**  Op.  cit.,  p.  122. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  313 

We  have  the  narrative  of  the  proceedings  at  the  first  synod. 
Then  we  follow  with  breathless  interest  the  thrilling  ad- 
ventures of  the  first  missionary  journeys,  and  we  come  upon 
the  founding  of  the  first  European  church.  The  Book  of 
Beginnings  in  the  Old  Testament  told  us  about  the  begin- 
nings of  the  world  and  of  the  race  and  of  sin  in  the  race. 
It  recorded  the  first  promise  of  redemption  and  the  begin- 
ning of  the  chosen  race.  Luke  writes  "the  beginning  of  the 
end."  He  tells  us  of  the  fulfillment  of  the  promise  of  re- 
demption in  the  incarnation,  the  resurrection,  and  the  ascen- 
sion of  the  Lord.  Then  he  records  the  beginnings  of  the 
Christian  Church  and  of  the  final  dispensation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  the  regeneration  and  the  education  of  men. 

2.  As  a  Help  to  Faith.  This  book  is  invaluable  again  in 
showing  what  a  Christ-honoring  and  a  Spirit-filled  church 
can  accomplish  in  the  face  of  fearful  odds.  It  has  been 
said  that  there  are  five  great  powers  which  always  have 
moved  and  governed  human  society — eloquence,  learning, 
wealth,  rank,  arms.  In  the  beginning  the  church  had  none 
of  these.  On  the  contrary,  all  of  these  were  arrayed  against 
it.  The  eloquence  of  the  orators  and  the  learning  of  the 
schools  and  the  wealth  of  the  world  and  the  higher  ranks 
of  society  and  the  armies  of  all  the  nations  were  its  foes. 
The  missionary  evangelists  of  this  book  never  base  their 
hope  of  success  upon  their  eloquence  or  their  learning  or 
their  wealth  or  their  nobility  of  birth,  and  the  only  weapon 
they  have  is  the  sword  of  the  Spirit,  the  Word  of  God, 
the  Gospel  of  Christ.  Yet  with  this  they  go  forth  to  an  im- 
mediate conquest  of  the  nations  for  their  Lord.  In  chapters 
ten  and  eleven  Peter  opens  the  way  into  the  Gentile  world, 
and  then,  with  the  swing  of  assured  and  continuous  victory, 
the  Church  moves  out  from  Jerusalem  into  all  Judaea,  and 
into  Samaria,  and  on  into  Asia  Minor  and  Europe,  and  on 
to  the  ends  of  the  earth.  We  read  that  the  disciples  were 
called  Christians  first  in  Antioch.^o     That  name  had  in  it 

**Acts  II.  26. 


314     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

the  suggestion  of  a  cosmopolitan  destination.  It  embodied 
a  Hebrew  conception  in  a  Greek  word  with  a  Latin  termi- 
nation. The  book  of  Acts  begins  with  the  Hebrew  church, 
and  records  its  planting  in  the  Greek  world,  and  terminates 
in  the  Latin  capital,  Rome.  It  shows  how  the  Christian 
Church  was  true  to  its  name  and  became  the  church  of  all 
the  lands. 

Notice  the  progress  of  the  Kingdom  in  this  book,  with 
three  thousand  at  Pentecost  and  five  thousand  a  little  later, 
followed  by  propagandism  in  Samaria  and  Damascus  and 
Antioch,  and  then  by  the  systematic  evangelization  of  all  the 
regions  beyond.  In  an  incredibly  short  time  the  church  is 
established  in  Lystra  and  Iconium  and  Ephesus  and  Philippi 
and  Thessalonica  and  Corinth  and  Rome.  It  was  no  easy 
task  which  the  church  undertook.  Those  first  evangelists 
had  to  turn  the  world  upside  down,  and  that  is  not  an  easy 
thing  to  do  while  you  are  living  in  it  and  on  it.  They  had 
to  face  the  prejudices  and  the  bigotries  of  the  centuries. 
They  had  to  overthrow  the  barbarisms  and  the  supersti- 
tions of  the  nations.  Their  message  brought  them  into 
direct  conflict  with  the  idolatries  of  all  the  lands  and  with 
the  licentiousness  rampant  in  all  the  Orient.  It  was  no  easy 
thing  to  win  the  victory  against  such  foes. 

Often  too  there  were  as  many  discouragements  within  as 
without.  There  were  excitement  and  excess  among  new 
converts.  There  were  fanaticism  and  folly  inside  the  fold. 
There  were  dissensions  and  divisions  and  defections.  There 
were  misconceptions  and  misrepresentations.  There  were 
false  doctrines  and  false  teachers.  Some  made  mistakes 
and  some  fell  into  sin.  Yet  everywhere  the  gospel  made  its 
way  and  proved  itself  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation  to 
those  who  believed,  whether  it  was  the  cripple  begging  for 
alms  or  the  proconsul  astonished  at  the  teaching  of  the  Lord, 
the  Jews  who  had  crucified  the  Christ,  the  Samaritans  who 
had  been  amazed  at  the  sorceries  of  Simon,  the  barbarians 
of  the  highlands  of  Asia,  the  philosophers  of  the  Areopagus 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  315 

court,  the  soldiers  and  centurions  of  the  Roman  legions,  the 
servants  of  Caesar's  household,  the  slaves  everywhere,  jail- 
ers, merchants,  high  officials,  Jewish  priests,  women  of  high 
and  low  degree;  all  were  caught  in  the  rising  tide  of  evan- 
gelism and  swept  as  by  an  irresistible  current  into  the  king- 
dom and  church  of  the  resurrected  Lord.  Philip,  Barnabas, 
Silas,  Timothy,  Luke,  and  Paul — here  is  a  list  of  world- 
conquerors  to  match  with  Cyrus,  Alexander,  Csesar,  and 
Napoleon.  They  conquer  without  armies  and  bloodshed,  by 
the  presence  of  the  Spirit  and  the  power  of  the  truth.  This 
book  is  invaluable  because  it  gives  the  history  of  their  move- 
ments and  methods  and  shows  us  the  secrets  of  their  suc- 
cess. The  church  of  to-day  has  no  greater  difficulties  with 
which  to  contend  and  it  ought  to  find  in  this  book  the  in- 
spiration for  its  immediate  conquest  of  the  world. 

3.  As  a  Manual  of  Revivals.  This  book  is  the  best  manual 
on  revivals  ever  written.  All  the  factors  necessary  for  the 
world's  evangelization  are  presented  here.  The  Lord  living 
and  active  in  behalf  of  his  own,  the  Omniscient  and  Omni- 
potent Spirit  leading  and  illuminating  all  who  are  obedient 
to  him,  disciples  testifying  to  that  which  they  themselves 
have  felt  and  known,  conviction,  enthusiasm,  faith,  and 
love — these  won  their  way  through  the  ancient  world,  and 
these  alone  will  win  the  modern  world  to  the  Christian 
standard  of  life.  The  book  of  Acts  has  all  the  abiding 
secrets  of  success  in  revival  work :  prayer,  plain  gospel 
preaching,  the  faithful  presentation  of  the  fundamentals  of 
the  faith,  directness  of  aim,  persistence  of  effort,  the  bap- 
tism of  the  Holy  Spirit.  When  Henry  Ward  Beecher 
first  went  into  the  wilderness  of  Indiana  to  preach  he  found 
that  he  could  not  get  any  of  his  hearers  either  convicted 
or  converted.  At  last  he  decided  to  study  the  book  of 
Acts  to  see  if  he  could  learn  from  it  the  secrets  of  apostolic 
success,  and  by  practicing  the  principles  he  found  there 
he  brought  hundreds  into  the  Kingdom.  He  was  a  fa- 
mous evangelist  in  those  beginning  days,  and  he  said:  "I 


3i6     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

owe  more  to  the  book  of  Acts  than  to  all  other  books 
put  together.  I  said  to  myself,  'There  was  a  reason  why, 
when  the  apostles  preached,  they  succeeded,  and  I  will 
find  it  out  if  it  is  to  be  found  out/  I  took  every  in- 
stance in  the  record  where  I  could  find  one  of  their  ser- 
mons and  analyzed  it,  and  asked  myself,  'What  were  the 
circumstances?  Who  were  the  people?  What  did  he 
do?'  I  studied  the  sermons  till  I  got  the  idea.  'Now,'  I 
said,  'I  will  make  a  sermon  so.'  I  remember  it  just  as  well 
as  if  it  were  yesterday.  There  were  seventeen  men  awak- 
ened under  that  sermon.  I  never  felt  so  triumphant  in  my 
life.  I  cried  all  the  way  home.  I  said  to  myself,  'Now  I 
know  how  to  preach.'  " 

There  are  ten  great  sermons  in  this  book,  and  they  are 
all  worthy  of  careful  study.  Five  are  by  Peter,  one  by 
Stephen,  and  four  by  Paul,  and  they  show  clearly  all  the 
essentials  of  apostolic  preaching.  They  all  have  one  theme, 
variously  presented,  but  with  unfailing  results.  In  one  of 
Dwight  L.  Moody's  last  addresses  he  said:  "In  my  forty 
years  of  observation  I  have  concluded  that  the  nearer  we  get 
to  the  apostolic  spirit  and  methods  the  more  power  we  will 
have  in  our  preaching.  .  .  .  These  apostles  and  preachers 
were  just  witnesses.  Twenty-three  times  in  this  book  we 
find  that  word  'witness.'  A  witness  just  tells  what  he 
knows.  A  witness  does  not  need  to  be  eloquent.  Let  him 
try  his  powers  of  oratory  on  the  judge,  and  the  judge  will 
set  him  down  quick.  'We  pay  the  lawyers  to  do  that,'  he 
will  say.  'You  just  tell  us  what  you  know.'  They  witnessed 
to  the  Lord's  resurrection  twenty-nine  times  in  the  record 
of  this  book,  and  they  witnessed  to  their  own  salvation ;  and 
the  Holy  Spirit  honored  their  testimony  in  the  conversion  of 
other  souls."  The  examples  of  conversion  in  this  book  are 
all  notable  and  worthy  of  careful  examination.  Note  the 
three  thousand  at  Pentecost,***  the  Samaritans,*^  the  Ethi- 

"Acts  2.  36-47. 
*'Acts  8.  12. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  317 

opian  eunuch,*2  Saul,*^  Cornelius  and  his  household,** 
Lydia,*'^  The  Philippian  jailer,**  and  Crispus  and  the  Cor- 
inthians.*'^ 

4.  As  a  Biography  of  Paul.  Next  to  the  one  great  bio- 
graphy of  the  Gospels,  the  biographies  of  this  book  are  most 
cherished  in  the  memories  and  hearts  of  the  Christian  world ; 
and  chief  among  these  is  the  biography  of  Paul.  His  life  is 
one  of  the  great  epics  of  biography,  an  Iliad  and  Odyssey 
combined,  a  life  of  constant  wandering,  constant  conflict,  and 
constant  victory.  There  is  no  Anabasis  in  it  from  be- 
ginning to  end,  no  retreat;  but  wherever  the  Greek  tongue 
was  spoken  and  there  were  souls  to  be  reached  and  helped 
and  saved,  over  the  rivers,  the  continents,  the  seas,  Paul 
went  to  labor  and  preach.  He  was  an  ambassador  from 
heaven.  The  love  of  Christ  was  as  a  fire  within  his  bones, 
constraining  him  to  push  on  and  on  and  ever  on  in  his  flam- 
ing evangelism.  He  was  the  advocate  of  Christianity  before 
the  bar  of  the  world.  Before  the  Jewish  Sanhedrin,  on  the 
Athenian  Areopagus,  in  the  imperial  courtroom  at  Rome,  he 
was  equally  at  home.  Born  a  Jew  in  a  Greek  city  as  a 
Roman  citizen,  the  world  was  his  parish  and  its  conversion 
his  one  aim  in  life.  He  preached  by  day  and  he  labored  by 
night.  He  founded  churches  here  and  there  and  every- 
where. He  laid  broad  and  deep  the  foundations  of  a  Chris- 
tian empire  which  was  destined  to  reach  beyond  the  bounds 
of  the  empire  of  Rome. 

He  was  a  seer  of  visions  and  an  organizer  of  churches,  an 
idealist  and  a  realist  combined,  a  most  strange  and  unusual 
combination.  He  was  Christianity's  greatest  theologian 
and  the  world's  greatest  missionary.  He  gave  a  system- 
atic theology  to  the  infant  church ;  and  he  gave  an  organized 
and  established  church  to  the  Graeco-Roman  world.  With 
a  genius  unsurpassed  in  his  time  and  with  an  endurance 

"Acts  8.  27-40.  "Acts  16.  14-16. 

"Acts  9.  1-19.  "Acts  16.  25-34. 

"Acts  10.  1-48.  "Acts  18.  8. 


3i8     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

unparalleled  by  any  missionary  or  itinerant,  his  lifework  is 
the  marvel  of  church  history,  his  life  achievement  stands 
preeminent,  like  Mount  Shasta  towering  above  the  plain, 
unapproached  in  his  grandeur  and  alone  on  his  throne.  We 
cannot  be  too  thankful  to  Luke  that  he  has  devoted  more 
than  half  his  book  to  the  biography  of  this  man. 

IIL  Noticeable  Features  of  the  Book 

I.  Omissions.  The  book  of  the  Acts  covers  a  period  of 
approximately  thirty  years,  but  it  does  not  pretend  to  be  a 
complete  church  history  for  this  time.  It  necessarily  is  of  a 
somewhat  fragmentary  character.  The  author  has  made  a 
selection  of  incidents  out  of  a  multitude  which  he  doubtless 
had  at  hand.  John  declares  that  there  were  many  other 
things  which  Jesus  did,  but  which  John  left  unrecorded  in 
his  Gospel,  "the  which  if  they  should  be  written  every  one, 
I  suppose  that  even  the  world  itself  would  not  contain  the 
books  that  should  be  written."  ^^  Luke  must  have  been 
embarrassed  with  a  corresponding  richness  of  material  both 
in  the  lives  and  the  sayings  of  his  heroes.  Yet  some  of  his 
omissions  are  most  remarkable. 

(i)  We  have  noticed  that  "The  Acts  of  the  Apostles" 
almost  wholly  ignores  the  missionary  labors  and  successes 
of  the  apostolic  twelve.  We  know  that  they  and  the 
brethren  of  the  Lord  went  on  missionary  journeys,  ac- 
companied by  their  sisters  or  wives.'*^  Tradition  tells  us 
that  Thomas  preached  the  gospel  in  India,  that  Peter 
founded  the  church  in  Rome,  and  that  all  the  apostles  were 
active  in  the  gospel  propaganda  of  the  first  century;  but 
Luke  is  silent  upon  this  theme.  Apocryphal  Acts  of 
Thomas,  of  John,  of  Andrew,  and  others  were  early  cur- 
rent in  the  church,  evidently  composed  with  the  intention  of 
making  good  this  strange  omission  on  the  part  of  the  evan- 
gelist; but  their  absurd  fabrications  make  us  regret  all  the 

**John  21.  25. 
*•  I  Cor.  9.  5. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  319 

more  that  Luke  has  not  chosen  to  give  us  authentic  in- 
formation concerning  these  things.  We  would  Hke  to  know 
something  about  the  origin  of  the  New  Testament  liter- 
ature. Luke  ignores  all  the  literary  activity  of  the  early 
church.  If  he  had  told  us,  for  instance,  whether  Matthew 
wrote  all  of  our  first  Gospel  or  only  the  sayings  of  Jesus  to 
be  found  in  it,  how  much  of  the  discussion  and  the  investiga- 
tion of  these  later  years  might  have  been  avoided ! 

(2)  Mary  the  mother  of  Jesus  is  mentioned  in  the  first 
chapter  of  this  book,  but  Luke  leaves  her  there  on  her  knees 
in  prayer  with  the  disciples.^*'  He  gives  us  no  further  in- 
formation concerning  her.  He  knew  more,  but  he  has  not 
recorded  it.  All  the  Mariolatry  of  the  after  ages  might  have 
been  forestalled  if  he  had  told  us  all  he  knew.  How  long 
did  she  live?  Where  did  she  live?  Where  and  when  and 
how  did  she  die?  We  wish  we  knew.  Luke  knew,  but  he 
does  not  tell  us. 

(3)  Luke  leaves  the  biography  of  Peter  unfinished.  When 
did  Peter  leave  Jerusalem?  Where  did  he  go,  to  Rome  or 
to  Babylon,  to  the  West  or  to  the  East?  When  and  where 
was  he  martyred  ?  Luke  must  have  known  these  things.  He 
has  chosen  not  to  record  them  in  this  book. 

(4)  Luke  devotes  so  large  a  portion  of  this  book  to  the 
history  of  Paul  and  his  missionary  companions,  and  yet 
among  them  he  tells  us  nothing  of  Titus,  who  was  one  of 
the  most  faithful  and  serviceable  of  them  all.  We  learn 
from  other  sources  that  this  companion  of  Paul  was  a  man 
of  resolute  will  and  great  tact  in  dealing  with  difficulties 
which  milder  and  less  capable  spirits  would  not  venture  to 
face,  and  that  Paul  fell  back  upon  his  energy  and  wisdom 
again  and  again.  Strangely  enough,  Luke  does  not  even 
mention  his  name. 

(5)  One  of  the  most  remarkable  omissions  in  the  entire 
narrative  is  the  omission  of  any  mention  of  the  epistles  of 

"Acts  I.  14. 


320     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Paul.  If  these  epistles  had  perished,  we  never  would  have 
known  from  this  book  that  Paul  had  written  any.  These 
epistles  bulk  so  large  in  our  New  Testament.  They  fill  very 
nearly  the  same  space  in  it  as  do  Luke's  two  volumes  of 
church  history.  Together  with  these  they  make  up  more 
than  half  of  the  book.  Yet  Luke  makes  no  use  of  these 
epistles,  and  he  never  mentions  one  of  them.  They  seem  so 
important  to  us  that  it  is  difficult  for  us  to  see  how  Luke 
could  have  written  so  much  about  Paul  and  yet  never  have 
suggested  that  he  made  use  of  his  pen  as  well  as  his  tongue 
in  behalf  of  the  faith. 

(6)  When  we  turn  to  these  epistles  of  Paul  we  learn  from 
scattered  allusions  in  them  that  Luke  has  given  us  only  an 
outline,  a  suggestion,  of  the  manifold  and  marvelous  ad- 
ventures of  Paul.  Paul  was  scourged  on  five  different  oc- 
casions by  the  Jews;  Luke  fails  to  tell  us  of  any  of  them. 
Paul  was  beaten  three  times  by  the  Roman  lictors;  Luke 
tells  us  of  only  one  of  these.  Paul  was  imprisoned  seven 
times ;  Luke  tells  us  of  only  two  imprisonments.  Paul  was 
shipwrecked  four  times  at  least;  Luke  tells  us  of  but  one 
shipwreck,  and  that  the  last,  on  the  voyage  to  Rome.  In 
the  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  Paul  mentions  whole 
classes  of  hardships  which  he  had  undergone  for  the  sake 
of  the  gospel,  perils  from  rivers  and  from  robbers  and  from 
false  brethren,  hunger,  thirst,  fasting,  and  nakedness  in  the 
wilderness  ;^i  and  none  of  these  things  are  even  mentioned 
by  Luke.  There  is  so  much  of  Paul's  biography  which  Luke 
omits.  What  was  the  date  of  his  birth?  How  old  was  he 
when  he  was  converted?  Was  he  a  married  man,  a 
widower,  or  a  voluntary  celibate?  These  personal  details 
are  all  interesting  to  us,  and  Luke  could  have  settled  these 
questions  forever  by  a  few  added  words.  He  is  silent  at 
all  these  points. 

(7)  The  narrative  closes  with  unexpected  abruptness. 

"2  Cor.  II.  23-27. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  321 

We  are  told  that  Paul  lived  for  two  years  at  Rome  and 
preached  without  hindrance,  and  then  we  are  told  no  more. 
There  are  so  many  questions  we  would  like  to  ask  at  this 
point.  What  did  Paul  say  in  his  sermons  at  Rome  ?  Not  a 
single  sentence  from  that  rich  treasure  does  Luke  give  us. 
We  know  more  about  Paul's  preaching  for  a  single  day  in 
Athens  or  a  few  weeks  in  Thessalonica  or  a  few  months  in 
Galatia  than  we  do  about  this  two  years  of  ministry  in  the 
world  capital.  Was  Paul  released  from  his  imprisonment? 
Did  he  visit  Asia  Minor  again?  Did  he  make  the  intended 
missionary  journey  to  Spain?  Did  he  pass  through  the 
Pillars  of  Hercules  and  up  the  coast  beyond  to  the  British 
Isles  and  the  northern  "extremities  of  the  earth,"  as  some 
so  fondly  claim  ?  Did  Peter  and  Paul  meet  in  Rome  ?  Did 
they  both  suffer  martyrdom  in  that  city?  What  fierce  de- 
bates have  been  waged  over  these  questions !  The  uncer- 
tainty which  surrounds  them  to  this  day  illustrates  the  im- 
portance of  Luke's  narrative.  We  feel  that  we  can  rely 
upon  anything  he  tells  us ;  but  when  he  is  silent  we  are 
wholly  at  a  loss  and  have  no  sure  way  out  of  the  labyrinth 
of  our  own  questioning. 

(8)  The  book  of  the  Acts  is  a  history  of  the  founding  of 
the  Christian  Church,  yet  what  notable  omissions  there  are 
in  that  history!  Nothing  is  told  us  about  the  founding  of 
the  church  in  the  farther  East.  Nothing  is  told  us  about  the 
founding  of  the  church  at  Rome.  No  mention  is  made  of 
the  church  in  Egypt.  The  church  in  Alexandria  played  such 
an  important  part  in  the  later  history  that  we  would  hke  to 
know  something  about  its  beginnings.  Luke  is  silent  upon 
these  themes. 

(9)  There  are  so  many  things  concerning  the  constitution 
of  the  church  and  its  modes  of  worship  which  Luke  might 
have  told  us  but  which  he  has  omitted.  All  of  the  various 
forms  of  church  organization  which  have  evolved  in  the 
course  of  the  centuries  are  prone  to  claim  apostolic  author- 
ity, though  they  may  be  as  far  removed  from  each  other  as 


322     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

hierarchy  from  democracy.  Just  a  few  words  from  Luke 
might  have  settled  many  of  these  differences  forever. 
Some  may  be  glad  that  he  did  not  write  them,  while  others 
would  prefer  that  the  agelong  controversies  upon  these 
points  could  have  been  avoided. 

Luke  must  have  known  about  all  of  these  things.  Why 
has  he  chosen  not  to  tell  us  of  them?  Several  reasons  have 
been  suggested.  The  outbreaking  of  the  Neronian  persecu- 
tion, which  made  it  dangerous  for  a  man  to  indulge  in 
authorship  of  this  character,  may  have  prevented  Luke  from 
finishing  his  task.  After  the  death  of  the  apostle  Paul  he 
may  have  found  himself  thrust  out  into  such  continuous 
evangelistic  labors  that  he  had  no  further  leisure  for  literary 
work  of  any  kind.  His  own  imprisonment  and  martyrdom 
may  have  been  responsible  for  the  sudden  close  of  his  book. 
Jiilicher  seems  content  with  the  suggestion  that  the  book  of 
Acts  is  exactly  the  size  of  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke, 
and  that  Luke,  the  author  of  both,  was  satisfied  with  his 
second  work  when  it  had  reached  the  magnitude  of  the  first, 
and  so,  impelled  by  a  sense  of  proportion,  was  content  to 
quit  at  that  point.^^  xhjs  seems  to  us  rather  inadequate  as 
an  explanation. 

We  think  Luke  surely  must  have  intended  to  continue  his 
narrative.  He  may  have  planned  a  third  volume  to  crown 
his  historical  series.  He  may  have  intended  to  add  to  this 
second  volume,  as  events  developed,  the  account  of  further 
triumphs  or  final  martyrdoms.  We  do  not  know,  but  we 
are  inclined  to  believe  that  Hase  is  justified  in  saying:  "For 
a  genuine  historian  no  other  end  of  the  book  is  to  be  thought 
of  than  the  martyrdom  of  Paul,  as  the  Gospel  had  closed 
with  the  crucifixion  of  the  Lord.  Whether  this  close  was 
early  lost,  or  the  author  was  somehow  hindered  from  writ- 
ing it,  is  one  of  the  secrets  of  the  past.  I  say,  however, 
ideally,  in  the  mind  of  the  author,  another  ending  has  ex- 


Einleitung,  S.  362. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  323 

isted."  Balmer,  Bertrand,  Bleek,  Burkitt,  Credner,  Ewald, 
Meyer,  Rackham,  Ramsay,  Spitta,  Zahn,  and  many  others 
agree. 

There  were  most  thrilHng  events  in  the  years  immediately 
succeeding  the  close  of  the  book  of  Acts.  There  were  Paul's 
trial  at  Rome,  a  hearing  before  the  emperor  himself,  and 
possibly  an  acquittal  by  the  imperial  court.  Luke  has  told 
us  so  fully  about  Paul's  trials  before  subordinate  officials; 
what  a  climax  to  this  series  would  be  found  in  Paul's  final 
defense  and  final  victory!  There  was  the  martyrdom  of 
James,  the  brother  of  the  Lord.  Then  came  the  outbreak  of 
the  first  imperial  persecution  and  the  martyrdom  of  both 
Peter  and  Paul.  Then  Jerusalem  and  the  temple  were  de- 
stroyed and  the  Christian  Church  was  finally  freed  from  all 
Jewish  ritual  of  worship  and  all  restricting  ties  to  Palestine. 
Luke  knew  of  all  these  things  and  he  had  a  historian's  inter- 
est in  them.  He  surely  must  have  intended  to  chronicle 
them  at  some  later  time.  As  it  stands  our  book  of  Acts 
seems  surprisingly  incomplete. 

There  is  one  unfinished  book  in  our  Bible,  and  only  one. 
In  the  Old  Testament  the  books  of  the  Law  are  complete. 
The  prophets  fulfilled  their  mission  with  word  and  pen. 
The  Psalmbook  is  a  perfect  whole.  So  are  Job,  and  Prov- 
erbs, and  every  other  book.  In  the  New  Testament  the 
four  Gospels  complement  each  other  and  give  us  the  perfect 
picture  of  the  Lord.  The  epistles  meet  the  several  emergen- 
cies which  occasioned  them.  The  Apocalypse  ends  the 
volume  symmetrically,  and  is  itself  a  literary  gem.  What- 
ever the  reason  may  be,  there  is  one  unfinished  book  in  the 
Bible.  It  is  the  book  of  Acts.  The  Acts  of  the  Ascended 
Lord  are  still  in  process  of  consummation.  The  Acts  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  still  go  on.  The  Acts  of  the  Missionary  Church 
have  new  chapters  added  to  them  with  each  century.  This 
book  of  the  Acts  of  Jesus  and  the  Spirit  and  the  Church 
never  will  be  finished  through  all  eternity. 

2.  Parallelisms.    It  is  a  peculiarity  of  Luke's  style  that  he 


324     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

delights  in  personal  contrasts.  This  was  apparent  again  and 
again  in  the  Gospel,  where  he  placed  in  sharp  contrast  with 
each  other  the  Pharisee  and  the  publican,  the  good  Sama- 
ritan and  the  indifferent  Levite,  Dives  and  Lazarus,  Zach- 
arias  and  Mary,  Martha  and  Mary,  Simon  and  the  sinful 
woman,  the  penitent  and  the  impenitent  thief.  In  this  book 
we  have  a  yet  larger  illustration.  "First  there  is  a  general 
parallel  between  the  Gospel  according  to  Luke  and  the  book 
of  Acts.  After  a  prefatory  sentence  both  alike  begin  with 
an  introductory  period  of  waiting  and  preparation,  which  is 
more  or  less  in  private. ^^  Then  comes  a  baptism  of  the 
Spirit,^*  followed  by  a  period  of  active  work  and  min- 
istry. This  is  concluded  by  a  'passion'  or  period  of  suffer- 
ing, which  in  each  volume  occupies  a  seemingly  dispropor- 
tionate space.  The  analogy  here  will  appear  more  convinc- 
ing as  we  follow  the  later  chapters,  but  the  main  outline 
stands  out  clear.  After  early  anticipation^^  ^j^^j  ^  detailed 
journey  up  to  Jerusalem^^  with  'last  words'  of  the  suf- 
ferer,^'^  we  have  the  'passion  proper.  '^^  And  then  in  each 
case  the  book  ends  with  a  period  of  victorious  but  quiet 
preparation  for  a  further  advance,  or  another  volume."  ^^ 
Whatever  may  be  thought  of  this  parallelism  between  the 
two  books  written  by  Luke  there  can  be  no  question  about 
the  parallelism  inside  the  book  of  Acts  between  the  nar- 
ratives given  of  the  acts  of  Peter  in  the  beginning  chapters 
and  of  the  acts  of  Paul  in  the  closing  chapters  of  the  book. 
Like  Plutarch  at  a  later  date,  Luke  selects  from  the  lives  of 
his  two  heroes  those  incidents  which  are  most  nearly  related 
to  each  other  in  outward  semblance  and  in  inner  character. 


"^Luke  1-2;  Acts  i. 

"  Luke  3 ;  Acts  2. 

"Luke  9.  51;  Acts  19.  21. 

""Luke  17.  II  to  19.  48;  Acts  20  to  21,  17. 

"  Luke  20-21 ;  Acts  20.  17-38. 

"^Luke  22-23;  Acts  21.  17  to  chap.  28. 

^"  Rackham,  Commentary,  p.  xlvii. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  325 

Peter  is  suspected  of  drunkenness^^  and  Paul  is  accused 
of  madness. ^^  Peter  said,  "Silver  and  gold  have  I  none."  ®2 
Paul  said,  "I  coveted  no  man's  silver  or  gold."  ^^  Is  Peter 
miraculously  released  from  prison  at  Jerusalem  by  an 
angel?"*  Paul  is  miraculously  released  from  prison  at  Phil- 
ippi  by  an  earthquake.**'"'  Does  Peter  begin  his  miracles  of 
healing  by  the  restoration  of  a  man  lame  from  birth  ?^6  Paul 
begins  with  the  same  miracle  of  healing  a  man  lame  from 
birth  at  Lystra.**^  Does  Peter's  shadow  heal  the  sick?^^ 
Paul's  handkerchiefs  and  aprons  have  the  same  healing 
power.^^  As  Peter  heals  ^neas"*^  Paul  heals  the  father 
of  PopHus."^^  The  demons  fear  the  name  of  Peter,'^^  and 
they  also  fear  the  name  of  Paul.'^^ 

Over  against  the  encounter  of  Peter  with  Simon  Magus'^"* 
we  have  Paul's  encounter  with  Elymas  the  sorcerer.'^^ 
Both  raise  the  dead.  Peter  raises  Tabitha  from  the  dead,''^ 
and  Paul  restores  Eutychus  to  life."^"^  Peter  is  instrumental 
in  the  performance  of  a  punitive  miracle,  when  Ananias  and 
Sapphira  fall  dead,'''^  and  Paul  makes  use  of  a  correspond- 
ing power  when  he  smites  Elymas  with  blindness. "^^  The 
first  Gentile  convert  made  by  Peter  was  a  member  of  the 
noble  Cornelian  house  ;^"  and  the  first  Gentile  convert  made 
by  Paul  was  a  member  of  the  noble  ^milian  house. ^^ 
Gamaliel's  proposition  concerning  Peter^^  Js  paralleled  with 
Gallio's  treatment  of  Paul.^^ 


"Acts  2.  13.  ^-Acts  5.  16;  8.  7. 

"'Acts  26.  24.  "Acts  16.  18;  19.  II,  15;  28.  g. 

"Acts  3.  6.  "Acts  8.  18-24. 

"Acts  20.  33.  "Acts  13,  6-1 1. 

"Acts  12.  6-12.  "Acts  9.  36-42. 

"*Acts  16.  26-34.  "Acts  20.  9-12. 

"Acts  3.  2-10.  ^"Acts  5.  i-ii. 

"Acts  14.  8-10.  "Acts  13.  6-1 1. 

"Acts  5.  15.  *°Acts  10.  I. 

"Acts  19.  12.  "Acts  13.  12. 

"  Acts  9.  34.  "  Acts  5.  34-39. 

"Acts  28.  8.  "Acts  18.  14-17. 


326     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Visions  are  granted  to  both  these  men,  to  Peter  on  the 
housetop  at  Joppa,^^  and  to  Paul  on  the  road  to  Damas- 
cus.^5  The  agreement  in  the  narrative  is  all  the  more  re- 
markable since  the  vision  is  doubled  in  each  case,  a  cor- 
responding revelation  being  given  to  Cornelius  in  the  former 
instance,^^  and  to  Ananias  in  the  latter.^'^  We  notice, 
further,  that  Peter  hears  the  divine  voice  three  times^^  and 
that  the  story  of  the  threefold  revelation  is  three  times  re- 
peated in  the  book.^^  Paul  likewise  hears  a  voice  from 
heaven  three  times^^  and  the  story  is  repeated  three  times 
in  the  book.^^ 

Cornelius  falls  at  Peter's  feet  to  worship  him,^^  and  the 
same  divine  worship  is  proffered  to  Paul  at  Lystra  and 
Malta.^^  Both  Peter  and  Paul  refuse  the  worship  in 
strangely  parallel  phraseology .^"^ 

Peter  has  the  power  to  give  the  Holy  Spirit  by  the  laying 
on  of  hands  in  Samaria,^^  and  Paul  has  the  same  power  in 
Ephesus.^6  The  same  miracle,  the  miracle  of  tongues,  fol- 
lows in  similar  circumstances  with  Peter^^  and  with  Paul.^^ 
Both  are  persecuted  by  Sadducees  and  supported  by  Phari- 
sees in  the  Council.^^  Paul  adopts  the  language  of  Peter 
and  Peter  uses  the  language  of  Paul.  We  might  increase 
this  list  of  parallelisms,  but  it  will  be  sufficient  to  quote 
Holtzmann's  conclusion,  based  upon  these  and  other  pas- 
sages :  "Say  what  you  will,  the  fact  remains  that  in  the  Acts 
no  single  suflfering  or  miracle  of  Peter  is  recorded  which 
in  its  general  character  is  not  paralleled  in  the  miracles  and 
sufferings  of  Paul.^®'^ 

"Acts  10.  9-17,  **Acts  14.  12-14;  28.  6. 

*^Acts  9.  3-8.  "Acts  10.  26;  14.  15. 

"'Acts  10.  z-7-  *°Acts  8.  17-20. 

''Acts  9.  10-17.  "^Acts  19.  6. 

**Acts  10.  16.  "'Acts  10.  46. 

"^Acts  ID.  9-16;  10.  28;  II.  5-10.      "'Acts  19.  6. 

®"Acts  22.  7,  8,  10.  "Acts  5.  17,  34;  23.  6.  9. 

"Acts  9.  2)-7 ',  22.  6-10;  26.  13-18.      '°°  Hand-Commentar,  S.  320. 

^"Acts  10.  26. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  327 

Plutarch  paralleled  the  lives  of  great  men  among  the 
Romans  and  among  the  Greeks.  He  put  them  side  by  side 
and  selected  from  their  biographies  those  incidents  which 
emphasized  their  likeness  to  each  other,  and  the  method 
resulted  in  some  most  surprising  and  most  interesting  con- 
trasts and  comparisons.  In  the  same  way  it  would  seem 
that  Luke  had  aimed  to  parallel  Peter  and  Paul  and  to  show 
that  the  leaders  of  the  antagonistic  elements  in  the  early 
church,  the  Jewish  and  the  Gentile  elements,  were  alike  in 
words  and  deeds,  in  aims  and  in  accomplishments.  The 
Tubingen  School  jumped  to  the  conclusion  that  this  paral- 
lelism was  a  pure  invention  and  that  it  could  not  be  founded 
on  fact.  We  think  otherwise.  Genuine  history  sometimes 
has  strange  parallels  in  it. 

Salmon  has  called  our  attention  to  one  of  these  when  he 
says :  "On  the  principles  of  criticism  by  which  the  Acts  have 
been  judged,  the  history  of  France  for  the  first  half  of  the 
nineteenth  century  and  the  last  years  of  the  century  preced- 
ing, ought  to  be  rejected  as  but  an  attempt  to  make  a 
parallel  to  the  history  of  England  one  hundred  and  fifty 
years  before.  Both  stories  tell  of  a  revolution,  of  the  be- 
heading of  a  king,  of  the  foundation  of  a  republic,  suc- 
ceeded by  a  military  despotism,  and  ending  with  the  restora- 
tion of  the  exiled  family.  In  both  cases  the  restored  family 
misgoverns,  and  the  king  is  again  dethroned;  but  this  time 
a  republic  is  not  founded,  neither  is  the  king  put  to  death  ; 
but  he  retires  into  exile,  and  is  replaced  by  a  kinsman  who 
succeeds,  on  different  terms,  to  the  vacated  throne."  ^^^ 

There  is  the  strange  course  of  events  in  England  begin- 
ning with  the  Roundhead  Revolution  and  the  beheading  of 
Charles  I,  followed  by  the  Commonwealth  with  the  Rump 
Parliament,  followed  by  Cromwell,  and  then  the  restoration 
of  Charles  II  and  James  II  his  brother,  followed  by  the 
crowning  of  William  and  Mary  the  daughter  of  James  II, 


Salmon,  Introduction,  p.  311. 


328     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

on  the  basis  of  the  Declaration  of  Rights,  affirming  the 
ancient  Uberties  of  England.  Who  could  have  prophesied 
that  one  hundred  and  fifty  years  later  the  same  general 
course  of  events  would  take  place  in  the  history  of  France, 
beginning  with  the  beheading  of  Louis  XVI  in  the  French 
Revolution,  followed  by  the  Jacobins  and  the  Reign  of 
Terror,  followed  in  turn  by  Napoleon  the  First  Consul  and 
then  the  Emperor,  succeeded  by  the  restoration  of  Louis 
XVIII  and  Charles  X  his  brother,  and  then  the  July  Revolu- 
tion in  which  Louis  Philippe  was  made  the  "citizen  king," 
on  the  basis  of  an  altered  charter,  putting  the  religious 
bodies  on  a  level,  granting  the  freedom  of  the  press,  and 
limiting  the  powers  of  the  king?  There  the  history  stands 
and  no  one  thinks  of  questioning  its  authenticity  at  any  point 
because  it  becomes  possible  to  point  out  this  strange  parallel- 
ism. 

We  recall  another  strange  parallel  in  the  lives  of  two 
Americans,  Jonathan  Edwards  the  father  and  Jonathan  Ed- 
wards the  son.  Not  only  were  their  names  the  same  and 
were  they  much  alike  in  mental  and  spiritual  characteristics, 
but  also  the  course  of  events  in  their  lives  ran  very 
strangely  parallel.  Both  were  tutors  in  the  college  where 
they  had  been  students.  Each  of  them  was  first  ordained 
over  a  prominent  church  in  the  town  where  his  maternal 
grandfather  had  been  the  pastor.  Both  were  dismissed  on 
account  of  doctrinal  opinions.  Each  then  became  minister 
of  a  retired  parish.  Both  were  called  from  their  tempo- 
rary obscurity  to  the  presidency  of  a  college.  Each  died  at 
the  age  of  about  fifty-five  years,  soon  after  his  inaugura- 
tion. On  the  first  Sabbath  of  the  January  preceding  their 
death,  each  of  them  preached  from  the  text,  "This  year 
thou  shalt  die."  Will  the  critic  of  future  days  come  upon 
this  paralleHsm  and  decide  that  it  must  be  a  pure  invention 
and  that  no  father  and  son  ever  could  have  had  such 
strangely  parallel  careers?  There  are  no  parallels  in  the 
book  of  Acts  any  more  wonderful  than  these,  and  we  are  not 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  329 

inclined  to  doubt  their  historicity  on  the  sole  ground  of 
their  similarity. 

3.  Accuracy.  A  third  noticeable  feature  of  this  book  is 
the  historical  accuracy  it  has  been  shown  to  possess  by  all 
authority  which  can  be  cited  from  the  ancient  world.  On 
this  point  Rackham  has  said :  "We  shall  be  abundantly  satis- 
fied as  to  Luke's  historical  accuracy,  if  we  reflect  on  the  ex- 
traordinary test  to  which  it  was  put,  i.  c,  the  variety  of  scene 
and  circumstance  with  which  he  had  to  deal.  The  ground 
covered  reached  from  Jerusalem  to  Rome,  taking  in  Syria, 
Asia  Minor,  Greece,  and  Italy.  In  that  field  were  comprised 
all  manner  of  populations,  civilizations,  administrations — 
Jewish  and  Oriental  life.  Western  civilization,  great  capitals 
like  Antioch  and  Ephesus,  Roman  colonies,  independent 
towns,  Greek  cities,  'barbarian'  country  districts.  The 
history  covers  a  period  of  thirty  years  which  witnessed  in 
many  parts  great  political  changes.  Provinces  like  Cyprus 
and  Achaia  were  being  exchanged  between  the  emperor 
and  the  senate;  parts  of  Asia  Minor,  e.  g.,  Pisidia  and 
Lycaonia,  were  undergoing  a  process  of  annexation  and 
latinization ;  Judaea  itself  was  now  a  Roman  province  under 
a  procurator,  now  an  independent  state  under  a  Herodian 
king.  Yet  in  all  this  intricacy  of  political  arrangement  Luke 
is  never  found  tripping.  .  .  .  He  is  equally  at  home  with 
the  Sanhedrin  and  its  parties,  the  priests  and  temple  guard, 
and  the  Herodian  princes  at  Jerusalem,  with  the  proconsuls 
of  Cyprus  and  Achaia,  the  rulers  of  the  synagogue  and  first 
men  of  Antioch  in  Pisidia,  the  priest  of  Zeus  at  Lystra,  the 
prcctors,  lictors  and  jailer  of  Philippi,  the  politarchs  of  Thes- 
salonica,  the  Areopagus  of  Athens,  the  Asiarchs  with  the 
people,  assembly  and  secretary  of  Ephesus,  the  centurions, 
tribune  and  procurator  of  Judea,  the  first  man  of  Malta  and 
the  captain  of  the  camp  at  Rome.  Such  accuracy  would  have 
been  almost  impossible  for  a  writer  compiling  the  history 
fifty  years  later."  102 

'"Rackham,  Commentary,  p.  xlv. 


330     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

It  is  at  this  point  that  Luke's  reputation  has  been  gaining 
steadily  through  the  last  half  century.  His  accuracy  used 
to  be  questioned,  even  when  it  was  not  strenuously  denied, 
by  many  of  the  best  authorities;  but  the  investigations  of 
Lightfoot  and  Ramsay  and  Vigoroux  have  gone  far  to 
estabhsh  Luke's  unfailing  accuracy  in  geographical  and  po- 
litical and  social  data.  If  at  one  or  two  points  Luke  still 
seems  to  be  at  variance  with  other  ancient  authorities,  his 
proved  consistency  and  carefulness  as  a  historian  leads  us 
to  hope  and  believe  that  with  added  knowledge  on  our  part 
his  accuracy  may  be  vindicated  even  to  the  last  degree. 
Strabo  said  that  the  rulers  of  Cyprus  were  called  propraetors. 
Therefore  when  Luke  said  that  Sergius  Paulus  was  pro- 
consul in  Cyprus  the  older  commentators  decided  at  once 
that  Luke  had  made  a  mistake  in  this  title;  but  in  our  own 
day  Cesnola  has  found  a  coin  in  his  excavations  in  Cyprus 
with  the  name  of  Paulus  the  proconsul  upon  it.  Inasmuch 
as  the  coin  was  made  in  the  days  of  the  Emperor  Claudius, 
and  inasmuch  as  Paul  visited  Cyprus  during  this  emperor's 
reign,  it  may  be  the  name  of  Sergius  Paulus  himself  which 
appears  upon  this  coinage.  At  any  rate,  this  coin  has  proved 
that  Luke  was  correct  in  the  use  of  the  title. 

Luke  speaks  of  the  politarchs  at  Thessalonica.i*^^  This 
name  was  not  to  be  found  in  ancient  literature.  Therefore 
it  used  to  be  cited  as  a  proof  that  Luke  had  extraordinary 
powers  of  invention  rather  than  those  of  accurate  observa- 
tion. Yet  all  the  time  the  critics  were  assaihng  Luke  at  this 
point  a  Roman  triumphal  arch  was  standing  in  Thessalonica 
itself  on  which  the  title  politarchs  was  engraved  in  large 
letters.  The  arch  probably  was  erected  in  the  first  century 
after  Christ.  It  was  destroyed  by  the  Turks,  but  the  British 
Consul  rescued  the  block  containing  this  title  and  the  list  of 
the  politarchs  with  it,  and  it  is  now  one  of  the  treasures  of 
the  British  Museum.  More  recently  the  title  has  been 
found  on  no  less  than  nineteen  inscriptions  in  Macedonia 

""Acts  17.  6. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  331 

and  all  scholars  recognize  it  as  a  title  peculiar  to  Macedonian 
use  and  most  accurately  reported  by  Luke.^*^"* 

Luke  calls  the  governor  of  Malta  the  Primus,  or  chief 
man.^"^  The  scholars  could  not  find  this  name  anywhere, 
and  they  were  sure  that  Luke  had  made  another  mistake  in 
the  use  of  this  title.  However,  an  ancient  inscription  has  been 
dug  up  in  Malta  with  this  title  upon  it ;  and  Luke's  accuracy 
has  been  vindicated  at  this  point.  Luke  describes  Philippi  as 
a  chief  city  of  the  jueptV  of  Macedonia. ^°^  Here  was  a  new 
name  for  a  district  or  province,  and  even  Westcott  and  Hort 
concluded  that  Luke  was  in  error  in  using  it,  and  they  have 
marked  it  as  a  doubtful  reading  in  their  text.  However, 
since  their  death  some  ancient  Macedonian  coins  have  been 
discovered  with  this  word  upon  them,  and  certain  documents 
have  been  found  in  the  Fayum  proving  beyond  a  doubt  that 
Luke's  technical  term  is  a  legitimate  one  and  one  particu- 
larly associated  with  Macedonia.^*' '^ 

Luke  never  mentions  the  epistles  of  Paul,  and  yet  Luther 
called  the  book  of  Acts  a  commentary  upon  these  epistles. 
They  give  us  the  historical  setting  for  all  of  them  except  the 
Pastoral  Epistles  and  the  volume  of  undesigned  coincidences 
between  the  historical  narrative  of  Luke  and  the  private 
and  the  public  letters  of  Paul  go  a  great  way  toward  estab- 
lishing the  authenticity  and  the  reliability  of  both.  Paley's 
Horae  Paulinae  is  the  classic  presentation  of  the  argument 
founded  upon  these  coincidences. 

Luke's  accuracy  in  general  and  in  minor  details  can  be 
well  tested  in  the  chapter  in  which  he  gives  the  account  of 
the  voyage  to  Rome  and  of  Paul's  shipwreck  on  the  island 
of  Malta.  Breusing,  director  of  the  naval  academy  in 
Bremen,  in  his  volume.  Die  Nautik  der  Altcn,  declares :  "The 
most  valuable  nautical  document  preserved  to  us  from  an- 

"**  Burton,  American  Journal  of  Theology,  vol.  ii,  pp.  598-632. 

'•*  Acts  28.  7- 

"*Acts  16.  12. 

'^  Hogarth,  Authority  and  Archaeology,  pp.  349-350. 


332     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

tiquity  is  the  description  of  the  sea  journey  and  shipwreck 
of  the  apostle  Paul.  Every  seaman  recognizes  at  once  that 
it  must  have  been  written  by  an  eyewitness."  ^^^  Schaff 
agrees :  "It  contains  more  information  about  ancient  naviga- 
tion than  any  work  of  Greek  or  Roman  literature,  and  be- 
trays the  minute  accuracy  of  an  intelligent  eyewitness,  who, 
though  not  a  professional  seaman,  was  very  familiar  with 
nautical  terms  from  close  observation.  He  uses  no  less  than 
sixteen  technical  terms,  some  of  them  rare,  to  describe  the 
motion  and  management  of  a  ship,  and  all  of  them  most 
appropriately;  and  he  is  strictly  correct  in  the  description 
of  the  localities  at  Crete,  Salmone,  Fair  Havens,  Cauda, 
Lasea  and  Phoenix  (two  small  places  recently  identified), 
and  Melita  (Malta),  as  well  as  the  motions  and  effects  of 
the  tempestuous  northeast  wind  called  Euraquilo  in  the 
Mediterranean."  ^^^ 

James  Smith  was  the  commodore  of  the  Royal  Northern 
Yacht  Club.  He  was  a  scholar  but  not  a  professional  theo- 
logian. He  sailed  over  the  course  of  Paul's  voyage  and  by 
a  multitude  of  minute  coincidences  he  was  convinced  of 
Luke's  faithfulness  to  the  truth  throughout.  Even  the 
soundings  and  the  nature  of  the  sea  bottom  off  Point  Koura 
in  the  island  of  Malta  confirmed  Luke's  account  of  the  ship- 
wreck. Smith  published  his  findings  in  a  volume.  The  Voy- 
age and  Shipwreck  of  St.  Paul.  The  book  has  gone  through 
several  editions  and  is  an  authoritative  presentation  of  the 
facts  in  this  field. 

All  that  Luke  tells  us  of  Gamaliel,  Agrippa  I,  Agrippa  II, 
Bernice,  Drusilla,  Felix,  Festus,  Gallio,  Sergius  Paulus  and 
other  historical  personages  is  confirmed  by  all  we  can  learn 
concerning  them  in  any  other  way.  His  delineation  of  char- 
acter agrees  with  that  we  can  obtain  from  any  reliable  sec- 
ular authority.  One  hundred  and  ten  persons  are  named  in 
the  book  of  Acts  and  Luke  has  made  theif  characters  vivid 

'"'  Op.  cit.,  S.  xiii. 

"°  Schaff,  op.  cit.,  pp.  736,  727. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  333 

and  individual.  They  are  more  than  names.  They  are  per- 
sonahties.  The  scenes  in  which  they  move  are  true  to  life 
and  the  opinions  and  positions  they  represent  are  always 
those  of  their  own  day  and  general  situation.  There  are  no 
anachronisms  either  in  their  thought  or  their  historical  set- 
ting. Luke's  accuracy  would  seem  to  be  attested  sufficiently 
by  ancient  histories,  coins,  and  inscriptions,  as  well  as  by 
the  most  searching  geographical,  topographical,  and  nautical 
investigation.  His  critics  have  alleged  many  errors  against 
him,  but  again  and  again  these  errors  have  been  proved  to 
be  those  of  the  critics  themselves.  Luke  is  to  be  judged 
by  the  standard  of  his  day  rather  than  by  that  of  our  own, 
but,  judged  by  this  standard,  he  compares  favorably  with 
the  greatest  and  best  of  the  ancient  historians. ^^^ 

IV.  Author  and  Sources  of  Information 

Dr.  J.  Rendel  Harris  estimates  the  results  of  recent 
criticism  upon  the  authorship  of  the  book  of  Acts  as  fol- 
lows: "Thanks  to  the  acuteness  of  Ramsay's  archaeological 
and  historical  criticism,  taken  along  with  the  linguistic  re- 
searches of  Hawkins,  the  studies  in  medical  language  of 
Hobart,  and,  finally,  the  weighty  and  apparently  unanswer- 
able criticisms  of  Harnack  (himself  a  convert  from  very 
different  views  of  the  composition  of  the  Lucan  writings), 
we  are  able  to  affirm  Luke's  rights  over  the  works  commonly 
attributed  to  him  with  an  emphasis  that  has  probably  not 
been  laid  upon  them  since  their  first  publication."  m  Luke's 
authorship  of  the  book  of  Acts  is  denied  by  Baur,  Clemen, 
Hausrath,  Hilgenfeld,  Holtzmann,  Julicher,  Konigsmann, 
Knopf,    Norden,    Overbeck,    Pfleiderer,    Schiirer,    Spitta, 


""Compare  Kirsopp  Lake  on  the  "we-clauses,"  Dictionary  of 
Apostolic  Church,  vol.  i,  p.  22.  Also  Harnack,  The  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  p.  298,  "Judged  from  almost  every  possible  standpoint  of 
historical  criticism  it  is  a  solid,  respectable,  and  in  many  respects 
an  extraordinary  work." 

"'  In  The  British  Friend,  April,  1913. 


334     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Soltau,  Sorof,  von  Soden,  J.  Weiss,  de  Wette,  Weizsacker, 
Wendt,  and  Zeller ;  but  it  has  been  clearly  proved  by  Blass, 
Credner,  Harnack,  Hawkins,  Hobart,  Klostermann,  Plum- 
mer,  Ramsay,  Renan,  Vogel,  Bernhard  Weiss,  and  Theodore 
Zahn  that  the  Gospel  and  the  book  of  Acts  were  written  by 
the  same  man  and  have  the  same  characteristics  of  spirit 
and  style  throughout  and  that  these  are  the  characteristics  of 
Luke,  and  there  is  a  growing  inclination  everywhere  to 
accept  the  traditional  authorship  as  most  fully  meeting 
all  the  demands  of  the  case.^i^  The  Gospel  and  the  book 
of  Acts  are  too  important  in  the  New  Testament  literature, 
and  Luke  is  too  unimportant  in  the  New  Testament  history 
for  them  to  have  been  ascribed  to  him  in  the  beginning  ex- 
cept upon  the  best  of  evidence;  and  the  most  painstaking 
investigation  in  this  critical  age  only  confirms  the  judgment 
of  the  Fathers  at  this  point. 

Luke's  name  is  not  found  in  connection  with  the  book  of 
Acts  in  any  uncial  manuscript,  and  his  name  does  not  occur 
anywhere  in  the  narrative  itself,  and  therefore  others  have 
been  suggested  as  possible  authors,  Timothy,  Titus,  Silas, 
and  other  companions  of  Paul;  but  the  similarities  of  style 
and  of  structure  between  this  book  and  the  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  Luke  have  convinced  the  best  of  the  modern  critics  of 
a  single  authorship  for  the  two  works,  and  Mofifatt  declares 
that  the  contrary  hypothesis  "should  nowadays  be  decently 
interred  under  the  epitaph,  'Non  fui,  fui,  non  sum.' " 

Therefore,  recognizing  Luke  as  the  author,  we  conclude 
from  the  narrative  itself  that  he  was  a  hero-worshiper  of 
the  first  order,  believing,  like  Carlyle,  that  history  prin- 
cipally and  essentially  was  only  the  history  of  great  men, 
and  that  The  Acts  of  these  creative  days  in  church  history 
could  be  presented  best  in  the  biographies  of  Peter  and  Paul. 

"^  Kirsopp  Lake,  in  the  Dictionary  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  vol.  i, 
p.  20,  concludes :  "The  traditional  view  that  Luke,  the  companion  of 
St.  Paul,  was  the  editor  of  the  whole  book  is  the  most  reasonable 
one." 


THE  BOOK  OF  ACTS  335 

Two  thirds  of  the  book-  are  given  to  the  biography  of  Paul, 
practically  all  of  it  after  the  first  twelve  chapters,  and  Paul 
is  mentioned  at  least  seven  times  in  five  of  these  beginning 
chapters.113  In  all  probability  Luke  never  would  have 
written  this  book  if  he  had  not  had  such  an  admiration  for 
Paul.  To  Luke  Paul  is  a  hero  of  the  first  class,  and  his  life 
history  is  worthy  of  record  together  with  that  of  the  Master. 
Luke  must  have  been  a  man  of  open  eyes  and  open  ears, 
a  man  who  carried  a  notebook  and  kept  a  diary.  The  "we 
sections,"  so  called,^ ^^  are  extracts  from  his  diary.  David- 
son says  of  these,  "They  are  characterized  by  a  circumstan- 
tiality of  detail,  a  vividness  of  description,  an  exact  knowl- 
edge of  localities,  an  acquaintance  with  the  habits  and 
phrases  of  seamen,  which  betray  one  who  was  personally 
present."  The  accounts  of  the  mission  in  Samaria,  the  elec- 
tion of  the  deacons,  the  martyrdom  of  Stephen  doubtless 
were  jottings  in  Luke's  notebook,  made  in  those  days 
which  he  spent  in  the  home  of  Philip  in  Csesarea.^^^  He 
may  also  have  met  Cornelius  there  and  heard  from 
his  own  lips  his  wonderful  story.  Some  of  these 
things  he  saw  and  some  he  heard  from  the  mouths  of  prin- 
cipal actors  or  eyewitnesses,  such  as  Paul  and  his  compan- 
ions, Aristarchus,  Erastus,  Silas,  Sopater,  Timothy,  Titus, 
Trophimus,  and  Tychicus,  and  such  as  Barnabas  and  John 
Mark  and  Manaen  and  Mnason  and  Symeon  Niger  and 
Lucius  of  Cyrene.  Then  there  were  the  apostles  James  and 
Peter,  and  others  whom  Luke  may  have  met,  either  at  Jeru- 
salem or  at  Rome.  At  any  rate,  he  must  have  listened  to 
the  accounts  given  by  many  of  the  eyewitnesses  and  min- 
isters of  the  Word  concerning  all  of  these  events  which  he 
has  recorded  in  the  book  of  Acts.  He  had  first  hand  and 
first-class    authority    for    all   his    statements,    and    he   has 


"'Acts  7.  58;  8.  I ;  9.  1-30;  II.  25,  26,  30;  12.  25. 
"*Acts  16.  10-17;  20.  5-15;  21.  1-18;  27.  I  to  28.  16. 
""Acts  21.  8-10. 


336     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

weighed  and  sifted  them  with  the  care  of  a  first-rate  his- 
torian. 

He  also  may  have  had  access  to  some  documents,  as  he 
had  in  the  composition  of  the  Gospel.  It  is  acknowledged 
by  all  that  there  is  a  certain  difference  of  style  between  the 
earlier  chapters  and  the  later  chapters  of  this  book.  The 
prologue  and  the  "we  sections"  are  written  in  purer  Greek. 
The  earlier  chapters  are  more  Aramaic  in  character.  Stated 
vaguely  and  generally  this  is  true,  and  the  more  Aramaic 
character  of  the  earlier  portion  of  the  book  may  be  ac- 
counted for  by  the  fact  that  Luke  was  more  dependent  here 
upon  narratives  already  put  into  written  form. 

The  Gospel  according  to  Luke  is  the  longest  book  in  the 
New  Testament.  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  is  next  in  size. 
It  may  be  considered  more  important  than  the  Gospel  since 
it  is  the  sole  authority  in  its  field.  There  are  more  textual 
variations  in  the  book  of  Acts  than  in  any  other  New  Testa- 
ment book.  It  is  in  this  book  that  the  Bezan  or  Western 
readings  introduced  the  largest  number  of  additions  and 
changes.  We  are  inclined  to  think  that  this  book  was  given 
its  final  touches  about  A.  D.  63,  and  that  it  therefore  ante- 
dated the  final  editing  of  the  Gospel. 

We  are  thankful  for  all  which  Luke  has  written.  It  is 
an  invaluable  treasure.  We  are  disposed  to  say  that  Luke 
is  without  a  peer  among  historical  writers,  for  he  has  de- 
scribed the  most  sublime  life  which  ever  appeared  in  the 
world,  and  then  he  has  written  a  second  book  describing  the 
origin  and  growth  of  the  most  powerful  intellectual,  moral, 
and  social  force  which  has  influenced  the  world.  No  other 
historian  has  had  access  to  the  original  sources  for  the 
delineation  of  such  important  themes. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

We  give  an  alphabetical  list  of  a  few  good  books  on  each  of  the 
fields  of  study  covered  in  this  volume,  and  we  star  some  of  the  best 
of  these. 

I.  Introductions  to  the  New  Testament 

Adeney,  Walter  F.    A  Biblical  Introduction,  New  Testament. 

Allen  and  Grensted.    Introduction  to  the  Books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 

Bacon,  B.  W.    An  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament. 

Bleek,  Friedrich.     Einleitung  in  das  Neue  Testament. 

Book  by  Book. 

Books  of  the  Bible. 

Clemen,  Carl.     Entstehung  des  Neuen  Testaments. 

Cone,  Orello.    The  Gospel  and  its  Earliest  Interpretations. 

Davidson,    Samuel.    An    Introduction    to   the   Study   of   the    New 
Testament. 

Dods,  Marcus.    An  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament. 

Eichhorn,  Johann  G.    Historisch-kritische  Einleitung  in  das  Neue 
Testament. 

♦Farrar,  Frederick  W.    Messages  of  the  Books. 

*Fraser,  Donald.    Lectures  on  the  Bible. 

Harnack,  Adolf.    Das  Neue  Testament  um  das  Jahr  200. 
Die  altchristliche  Literatur. 

Holtzmann,  H.  J.    Lehrbuch  der  historisch-kritischen  Einleitung  in 
das  Neue  Testament. 

Jiilicher,  Adolf.     Einleitung  in  das  Neue  Testament. 

Martin,  G.  Currie.    The  Books  of  the  New  Testament. 

*McClymont,  J.  A.    The  New  Testament  and  its  Writers. 

Michaelis,  Johann  David.     Introduction  to  the  Divine  Scriptures  of 
the  New  Covenant. 

Milligan,  George.     The  New  Testament  Documents. 

♦Mof!^att,  James.    Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 

*Peake,  Arthur  S.    A  Critical  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament. 

Pullan,  Leighton.     The  Books  of  the  New  Testament. 

Reuss,  Eduard.    Geschichte  der  heiligen  Schriften  des  Neuen  Testa- 
ments. 

Salmon,  George.     Introduction  to  the  New  Testament 

Sanday,  W.    Inspiration. 

337 


338     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

♦Strong,  A.  H.     Popular  Lectures  on  the  Books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 
Von  Soden,  Hermann.    The  History  of  Early  Christian  Literature. 
Weiss,  Bernhard.    A  Manual  of  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament. 
Willett  and  Campbell.    The  Teachings  of  the  Books. 
*Zahn,  Theodore.     Introduction  to  the  New  Testament. 

II.  Commentaries  on  the  New  Testament 

Cambridge  Bible. 
Cambridge  Greek  Testament. 
♦Century  Bible. 
Expositor's  Bible. 
♦Expositor's  Greek  Testament. 
Handbuch  zum  Neuen  Testament. 
Hand-Commentar  zum  Neuen  Testament. 
♦International  Critical  Commentary. 
International  Handbooks  to  the  New  Testament. 
Meyer's  Commentary  on  the  New  Testament. 
Schriften  des  Neuen  Testaments. 
♦Westminster  Commentaries. 
♦Westminster  New  Testament, 

III.  The  Gospels 

Baur,  F.  C.    Die  Evangelien. 

♦Burkitt,  F,  C.    The  Gospel  History  and  its  Transmission. 

Cone,  Orello.    Gospel  Criticism  and  Historical  Christianity. 

Godet,  Frederic.  The  Collection  of  the  Gospels  and  the  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  Matthew. 

♦Robinson,  J.  A.    The  Study  of  the  Gospels. 

Salmon,  George.    The  Human  Element  in  the  Gospels. 

Sanday,  W.    The  Gospels  in  the  Second  Century. 

Stanton,  V.  H.    The  Gospels  as  Historical  Documents. 

Weizsacker,  Carl.  Untersuchungen  iiber  die  evangelische  Geschichte, 
ihre  Quellen  und  die  Gang  ihrer  Entwicklung. 

Wernle,  Paul.    Sources  of  our  Knowledge  of  the  Life  of  Christ. 

♦Westcott,  B.  F.     Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels. 

Wright,  Arthur.    The  Composition  of  the  Four  Gospels. 

IV.  Introduction  to  the  Synoptic  Gospels 

Abbott,  E.  A.    Clue. 

Bacon,  B.  W.    The  Beginnings  of  Gospel  Story. 

Buckley,  E.  R.    Introduction  to  the  Synoptic  Problem. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  339 

Burton,  E.  D.     Principles  of  Literary  Criticism  and  the  Synoptic 

Problem. 
Carpenter,  J.  E.    The  First  Three  Gospels,  their  Origin  and  Rela- 
tions. 
Gloag,  P.  J.     Introduction  to  the  Synoptic  Gospels. 
Harnack,  Adolf.    The  Sayings  of  Jesus. 
Hawkins,  J.  C.     Horse  Synopticae:  Contributions  to  the   Study  of 

the  Synoptic  Gospels. 
Holdsworth,  W.  W.     Gospel  Origins. 
Holtzmann,  H.  J.     Die  synoptische  Evangelien,  ihr  Ursprung  und 

geschichtlicher  Charakter. 
Huck,  A.    Synopse  der  drei  ersten  Evangelien. 
Jolley,  A.  J.    The  Synoptic  Problem  for  English  Readers. 
Loisy,  A.    Les  evangiles  synoptiques. 
♦Oxford  Studies  in  the  Synoptic  Problem. 
Patton,  Carl  S.    Sources  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels. 
Petrie,  W.   Flinders.     The  Growth  of   the  Gospels  as   shown  by 

Structural  Criticism. 
Rushbrooke,  W.  G.    Synopticon. 
Sanday,  W.    Survey  of  the  Synoptic  Question. 

Life  of  Christ  in  Modern  Research. 
Scott-Moncrieff,  C.  E.    St.  Mark  and  the  Triple  Tradition. 
Thompson,  J.  M.    The  Synoptic  Gospels. 

Volkmar,  Gustav.    Die  Evangelien,  oder  Marcus  und  die  Synopse. 
Weiss,   B.    Das   Marcusevangelium  und  seine  synoptischen   Paral- 

lelen. 

Das  Matthausevangelium  und  seine  Lucas-parallelen. 

Die  Quellen  des  Lucas-Evangeliums. 

Die  Quellen  des  synoptischen  Uberlieferung. 
Wernle,  Paul.     Die  synoptische  Frage. 
Wright,  Arthur.    Synopsis  of  the  Gospels  in  Greek. 

V.  COMMENTAKIES  ON  THE  SyNOPTIC  GoSPELS 

Bruce,  A.  B.    Expositor's  Greek  Testament. 

Gary,  G.  L.    International  Handbooks  to  the  New  Testament. 

Holtzmann,  H.  J.    Der  Hand-Commentar  zum  Neuen  Testament. 

Weiss,  B.    Meyer's  Commentary  on  the  New  Testament. 

Weiss,  J.    Die  Schriften  des  Neuen  Testaments. 

Wernle,  Paul.    Synoptische  Frage. 

VI.  Commentaries  on  the  Gospel  According  to  Matthew 
Allen,  W.  C.     International  Critical  Commentary. 
Broadus,  J.  A.    American  Commentary, 


340     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Carr,  A.    Cambridge  Greek  Testament. 

Holtzmann,  H.  J.     Hand-Commentar. 

Kiibel,  Robert.     Handbuch  zum  Evangelium  des  Matthaus. 

♦Morison,  James,  Practical  Commentary  on  the  Gospel  according 
to  St.  Matthew. 

*Plummer,  Alfred.  An  Exegetical  Commentary  on  the  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  St.  Matthew. 

Slater,  W.  F.     The  New  Century  Bible. 

Weiss,  B.    Meyer's  Commentary. 

Wellhausen,  J.    Das  Evangelium  Matthaei. 

Zahn,  Theodor.    Zahn's  Kommentar. 

Zockler,  Otto.    Lange's  Bibel  Werk. 

VII.  Commentaries  on  the  Gospel  According  to  Mark 

Bacon,  B.  W.    The  Beginnings  of  Gospel  Story. 

Burton,  E.  D.    Studies  in  Gospel  of  Mark. 

Cook,  F.  C.    Speaker's  Commentary. 

*Gould,  E.  P.     International  Critical  Commentary. 

Horton,  R.  F.    The  Cartoons  of  Mark. 

Maclear,  G.  F.    Cambridge  Greek  Testament. 

Menzies,  A.    The  Earliest  Gospel. 

Morison,  James.    Practical  Commentary  on  the  Gospel  according  to 

St.  Mark. 
Plumptre,  E.  H.    Ellicott's  Commentary. 
Salmond,  S.  D.  E.     New  Century  Bible. 
*Swete,  H.  B.     The  Gospel  according  to  St.  Mark. 
Weiss,     Bernhard.      Das     Evangelium     des     Markus    und    Lukas, 

Meyer's  Commentary. 
Weiss,  Johannes.     Das  alteste  Evangelium. 
Wellhausen,  J.     Das  Evangelium  Marci. 

VIII.  Commentaries  on  the  Gospel  According  to  Luke 

Adeney,  W.  F.    The  New  Century  Bible. 

Burton,  Henry.     Expositor's  Bible. 

Campbell,  C.    Critical  Studies  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel. 

Farrar,  F.  W.     Cambridge  Greek  Testament. 

Garvie,  A.  E.    Westminster  New  Testament. 

Godet,  Frederic.     Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke. 

Hervey,  Arthur.     The  Authenticity  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel. 

Hobart,  W.  K.    The  Medical  Language  of  St.  Luke. 

♦Plummer,  Alfred.     International  Critical  Commentary. 

Plumptre,  E.  H.    Ellicott's  Commentary. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  341 

Selwyn,  E.  C.    Luke  the  Prophet. 
Weiss,  Bernhard.     Mej'er's  Commentary. 
Wellhausen,  J.     Das  Evangelium  Lucae. 

IX.  The  Apostolic  Age 

♦Bartlet,  Vernon.  The  Apostolic  Age:  Its  Life,  Doctrine,  Worship, 
and  Polity. 

Dobschiitz,  Ernst  von.    Christian  Life  in  the  Primitive  Church. 

Harnack,  Adolf.  The  Expansion  of  Christianity  in  the  First  Three 
Centuries. 

Hausrath,  A.    Times  of  the  Apostles. 

Heinrici,  C.  F.  G.    Das  Urchristentum. 

Lechler,  G.  V.    The  Apostolic  and  Post-Apostolic  Times. 

Lightfoot,  J.  B.     Dissertations  on  the  Apostolic  Age. 

McGiffert,  A.  C.     A  History  of  Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age. 

Neander,  Augustus.  History  of  the  Planting  and  Training  of  the 
Christian  Church. 

Pfleiderer,  Otto.  Primitive  Christianity,  Its  Documents  and  Doc- 
trines. 

Purves,  G.  T.    Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age. 

Renan,  Ernest.    The  Apostles. 

Ritschl,  Albrecht.    The  Origin  of  the  Early  Catholic  Church. 

Ropes,  J.  H.    The  Apostolic  Age  in  the  Light  of  Modern  Criticism. 

Schaff,  Philip.     Apostolic  Christianity. 

Weizsiicker,  Carl  von.    The  Apostolic  Age  of  the  Christian  Church. 

♦Wernle,  Paul.     The  Beginnings  of  Christianity. 

X.  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles 

Blass,  Friedrich.     Acta  Apostolorum. 

Bartlet,  J.  V.     The  New  Century  Bible. 

Chase,  F.  H.    The  Credibility  of  Acts. 

Clemen,  C.     Die  Apostelgeschichte  im  Lichte  der  neueren  Forsch- 

ungen. 
Forbes,  H.  P.    International  Handbooks  to  the  New  Testament. 
Hackett,  H.  B.    American  Commentary. 
Harnack,  A.     Luke  the  Physician. 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 

The  Date  of  Acts  and  Synoptic  Gospels. 
Hilgenfeld,  A.  B.  C.    Acta  Apostolorum. 
Holtzmann,  H.  J.     Hand-Commentar. 
Jones,  Maurice.     St.  Paul  the  Orator. 
♦Knowling,  R.  J.    Expositor's  Greek  Testament. 


342     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

Lumby,  J.  Rawson.    Cambridge  Greek  Testament. 
Page,  T.  E.    The  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 
♦Rackham,  R.  B.    Westminster  Commentary. 
Ramsay,  W.  M.    The  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire. 

St.  Paul  the  Traveller. 

Pauline  Studies. 

The  Cities  of  St.  Paul. 

Luke  the  Physician. 
Stokes,  G.  T.    Expositor's  Bible. 

Smith,  James.    The  Voyage  and  Shipwreck  of  St.  Paul. 
Spitta,  Friedrich.     Die  Apostelgeschichte,  ihre  Quellen  und  deren 

Geschichtlicher  Wert. 
Weiss,  J.    Ueber  die  Absicht  und  den  literarischen  Charakter  der 

Apostelgeschichte. 
Wendt,  H.  H.    Meyer  Kommentar. 

Zeller,  Eduard.     Die  Apostelgeschichte  nach  ihrem  Inhalt  und  Ur- 
sprung  untersucht. 

The  articles  in  Hastings's  Bible  Dictionary,  Hastings's  Dictionary 
of  Christ  and  the  Gospels,  Hastings's  Dictionary  of  the  Apostolic 
Age,  Cheyne's  Encyclopedia  Biblica,  the  International  Standard  Bible 
Encyclopaedia,  and  other  general  authorities  may  be  consulted  with 
profit. 


I.  INDEX  OF  NAMES 


Abbott,  92,  165,  290,  338 

Adeney,  337,  340 

Adeodatus,  19 

Alexander,  114 

Alexander,  Bishop,  262,  263 

Alexandria,  116 

Alford,  86,  165,  202,  290,  297 

Alison,  192 

Allen,  86,  95,  122,  124,  163,  294, 

297.  337.  339 
Ambrose,  166 
Andrews,  235 
Angelico  da  Fiasola,  122 
Annas,  215,  239 
Aretaeus,  186,  197 
Aristarchus,  178 
Aristion,  168,  169 
Ariston,  168 
Athanasius,  116,  168 
Athenaeus,  197 

Augustine,  85,  123,  124,  166,  181 
Augustus,  215,  239 
Ayles,  85,  95 

Bacon,  294,  337,  338,  340 

Balmer,  323 

Bartholomew,  96 

Bartlet,  341 

Basil,  168 

Bauer,  124 

Baur,  124,  333,  338 

Beecher,  315 

Bellini,  122 

Bengel,  86,  134,  165 

Benson,  86 

Bertrand,  323 

Beyschlag,  204 

Bloomfield,  86 

Bickersteth,  165 

Bisping,  165 

Blass,  334,  341 

Bleek,  86,  95,  124,  165,  204,  323, 

338 
Bloomfield,  86 
Bonvicino,  122 
Bossuet,  211 
Box,  75 
Breusing,  331 


Broadus,  339 

Browning,  263 

Bruce,  45,  163,  339 

Bruder,  158 

Buckley,  338 

Burgon,  165 

Burkitt,  323,  338 

Burton,  E.,  89,  331,  339,  340 

Burton,  H.,  340 

Calovius,  99 

Calvin,  86,  184 

Campbell,  150,  165,  337,  340 

Carlyle,  265,  334 

Carpenter,  339 

Carr,  340 

Gary,  339 

Cave,  99 

Cesnola,  330 

Chase,  341 

Chrysostom,  166 

Claudius,  215,  330 

Clemen,  333,  337,  341 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  33,   116, 

121,  124,  168,  303 
Clement  of  Rome,  168 
Cleopas,  183 
Coleridge,  247 
Cone,  337,  338 
Cook,  165,  204,  340 
Conybeare,  168 
Cranmer,  184 
Credner,  86,  87,  128,  165,  204,  289, 

323. 334 
Cyprian,  168 
Cyril  of  Alexandria,  168 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  85,  168 

Da  Costa,  130 

D'Alembert,  241 

Dante,  265 

Davidson,  86,  165,  337 

Deissmann,  179 

Delitzsch,  42,  86,  124 

Demas,  177,  191 

De  Wette,  86,  124,  165,  204,  334 

Didymus,  166 

Dionysius,  116 


343 


344      THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 


Dioscorides,  i86,  197 
Divina  Commedia,  18 
Dobschiitz,  341 
Dods,  86,  337 
Dorotheus,  19 

Ebrard,  95,  165,  202,  290 

Edersheim,  165 

Edwards,  328 

Eichhorn,  165,  293,  337 

EUicott,  86,  165 

Epiphanius,  85,  113,  116,  124,  166, 

183, 196, 236 
Erasmus,  86 
Eusebius,  80,  85,  95,  n6,  119,  120, 

121,  122,  124,  144,  166,  168,  169, 

192,246,311 
Evans,  306 

Ewald,  86,  124,  133,  165,  204,  323 
Ewald,  P.,  120 

Farrar,  18,  21,  34,  79,  129,  139, 

165,  202,  290,  312,  337,  340 
Forbes,  341 
Fraser,  43,  337 
Fritzsche,  86,  124,  165 

Galen,  186,  226 

Garvie,  340 

Gfrorer,  75 

Gieseler,  289 

Gloag,  202,  289,  339 

Godet,  43,  72,  89, 95, 127, 165, 173, 

202,  204,  290,  338,  340 
Gould,  124,  165,  170,  290,  340 
Gregory,  165,  168 
Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  168 
Gregory  of  Nyssa,  168 
Grensted,  337 
Griesbach,  124,  165,  174 
Grotius,  99,  165 
Guericke,  86,  165,  202,  290 

Hackett,  341 
Hamlet,  18 

Harnack,  192,  217,  227,  228,  293, 
294,  297,  333,  334,  337,  339,  341 
Hams,  167,  333 
Hase,  322 
Hausrath,  333,  341 
Hawkins,  80,  155,  287,  333,  334, 

339 
Heinrici,  341 
Herder,  265 


Hermas,  166 

Herod  Antipas,  23 

Herodotus,  191,  311 

Hervey,  340 

Hilgenfeld,  86,  165,  204,  333,  341 

Hippocrates,  186,  187 

Hippolytus,  135,  136 

Hitzig,  124,  165 

Hobart,  226,  228,  333,  334,  340 

Hofmann,  165,  202 

Holdsworth,  87,  339 

Holtzmann,  86,  95,  124,  165,  204, 

293,  333.  337.  339.  340,  34i 
Homer,  177 
Home,  86,  202 
Hort,  165,  166,  228,  229,  331 
Horton,  159,  340 
Huck,  339 
Hug,  86,  95,  165,  173,  202,  204 

Irenaeus,  85,  121,  124,  166,  246, 

303 
Iverach,  283 

Jackson,  13,  295 

Jerome,  85, 116, 124, 168, 181, 192, 

204,  246 
JoUey,  339 
Jones,  341 
Julicher,  17,  86,  96,  204,  294,  322, 

333, 337 
Justin  Martyr,  120,  165 

Kahnis,  124,  134 
Keble,  188 
Keil,  86,  95,  202 
Keim,  18,  86,  95,  165,  204 
Kiel,  165 

Klostermann,  165,  334 
Knowling,  342 
Konigsmann,  333 
Kostlin,  86,  124,  204 
Knopf,  333 
Kubel,  340 
Kuinoel,  165,  204 

Lachmann,  124,  165,  289 

Lake,  333,  334 

Lamb,  265 

Lange,  95, 115,  131,  134,  165,  202, 

289 
Lardner,  86,  202 
Latimer,  184 
Lechler,  341 


INDEX  OF  NAMES 


345 


Lee,  86 

Lessing,  293 

Lightfoot,  86,  165,  181,  214,  330, 

341 

Loisy,  339 

Luckok,  115 

Lumby,  202,  289,  342 

Luthardt,  165 

Luther,  177,  184,  247,  331 

Lysanias,  215 

Macarius,  166,  167 

Macaulay,  311 

Maclaren,  266 

Maclean,  123,  124,  163,  165 

Maclear,  340 

Martin,  337 

Matthaei,  165 

McClellan,  165 

McClymont,  337 

McGiffert,  86,  341 

Melanchthon,  184 

Menzies,  340 

Meyer,  95,  124,  134,  165,  204,  323 

Michaelis,  89,  165,  173,  202,  204, 

337 
MiU,  165 
Miller,  165 
Milligan,  337 
Milman,  288 
MofiFatt,  292,  334,  337 
Moody,  134,  316 
Moorehead,  93 

Morison,  86,  121,  146,  165,  340 
Moulton,  294 

Neander,  311,  341 
Nestle,  167 
Nestorius,  166 
Neudecker,  289 
Nicephonis,  1 16 
Norden,  333 
Norton,  165,  289 

(Ecolampadius,  184 
Olshausen,  86,  95,  115,  165 
Origen,  84,  85,  116,  121,  246,  303 
Overbeck,  333 

Page,  342 
Paley,  331 

Pantanus,  85,  96,  116 
Papias,  80,  85,  119,  120 
Paradise  Lost,  18 


Patton,  297,  339 

Paulus,  86 

Paul  Veronese,  36 

Peake,  12,  13,  337 

Petrie,  339 

Pfleiderer,  333,  341 

Philip,  215 

PUate,  158,  215 

Plummer,  190,  204,  218,  223,  247, 

263,  334,  340 
Plumptre,  179,  290,  297,  340 
Plutarch,  324,  327 
Pullan,  337 
Purves,  341 

Quirinius,  215 

Rackhara,  323,  324,  329,  342 
Ramsay,  179,  204,  217,  223,  323, 

330,  333,  334,  342 
Raphael,  140 
Renan,  17,  96,  177,  204,  222,  224, 

290,  334,  341 
Resch,  165,  168 
Reuss,  86,  124,  165,  204,  337 
R6vUle,  87 
Ridley,  184 
Riggenbach,  128 
Ritschl,  86,  124,  165,  341 
Roberts,  86 
Robinson,  164,  338 
Ropes,  341 
Rossetti,  189 
Row,  290 

Rushbrooke,  284,  339 
Ruskin,  117 

Salmon,  86,   124,   165,   170,   171, 

172,  327,  337.  338 
Salmond,  124,  153,  165,  340 
Sanday,  95,  201,  204,  223,  270, 

337,  338,  339 
Schaff,  86,  131,  165,  184,  190,  191, 

202,  216,262,  290,297,311,332, 

341 
Schenkel,  124,  165,  204 
Schleicrmacher,  165,  219,  293 
Schmiedel,  296 
Scholten,  124,  165 
Scholz,  165 
Schott,  86,  204 
Schulthess,  174 
Schulz,  165,  174 
Schurer,  12,  333 


346      THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 


Scott,  192 

Scott-Moncrief ,  339 
Scrivener,  165 
Selwyn,  341 
Sergius  Paulus,  107 
Shakespeare,  177,  264 
Slater,  340 
Smith,  192,  332,  342 
Socrates,  34 
Soltau,  334 
Sorof,  334 

Spitta,  323,  333,  342 
Stanton,  292,  338 
Stevenson,  94 
Stier,  165 
Stokes,  342 
Storr,  124,  165 
Strabo,  330 
Streeter,  139 
Strong,  337 
Stroud,  279 
Stuart,  86 
Swete,  165,  340 

Tennyson,  147 

Tertullian,  120,  121,  168,  303 

Theodore,  19 

Theodoret,  168 

Theodore  tus,  19 

Theodorus  Lector,  190 

Theodosius,  114 

Theophylact,  183 

Thiersch,  86,  124,  204,  290 

Tholuck,  56,  202,  204 

Thomas,  20 

Thompson,  284,  339 

Thomson,  72,  86,  115,  130,  165, 

202,  290 
Thucydides,  191 
Tiberius,  215 
Tillemont,  99 


Tischendorf,  86,  165,  171 

Van  Oosterzee,  216 

Vigoroux,  330 

Victor  of  Aitioch,  123,  168 

Vogel,  334 

Volkmar,  124,  339 

Voltaire,  241 

Wace,  165 
Warfield,  165 
Warren,  116 

Weiss,  21,  86,  89,  93,  95,  124,  140, 
141,  165,  204, 290,  294,  334, 337, 

339,  340,  341.  342 
Weiss,  J.,  334,  339,  340,  342 
Weisse,  124,  293 
Weizsacker,  124,  334,  338,  341 
Wellhausen,  294,  340,  341 
Wendt,  290,  334,  342 
Wemle,  338,  339,  341 
Wesley,  177,  184,  310,  311 
Westcott,  160,  165,  166,  228,  229, 

279,  289,  297,  331,  338 
Weston,  93 
Wetstein,  86,  165 
Whitefield,  184 
Wieseler,  165,  202 
Wilke,  86,  124 
Willett,  337 
Wilson,  217 
Wolf,  165 
Wordsworth,  165 
Wright,  95,  124,  284,  289,  338,  339 

Zahn,  13,  17,  18,  86,  115,  135,  158, 
165, 168, 196,  294, 295, 323, 334, 

337.  340 
Zeller,  165,  204,  334,  342 
Zockler,  309,  340 
Zwingli,  184 


II.   INDEX  OF  TEXTS 


Excxius 

4.  22,  23,  150 
Numbers 

12.  6,  77 
Deuteronomy 

23-  3.  6,  64 
I  Samuel 

28.  6,  77 
Isaiah 

II.  I,  40 
Joel 

2.  28,  78 
Micah 

5-  2,  40 
Zechariah 

4.  14,  304;  II.  12,  13,  46 
Malachi 

3-  I,  125 
Matthew 

I.    I,  39,   54,   206;   I.   17,   76; 

1.  19,  47;  I.  20,  78;  I.  22,  44; 

2.  1-12,  65;  2.  1-23,  76;  2.  2, 
53.  55.  207;  2.  5,  46;  2.  6,  40, 
45,  90;  2.  II,  54;  2.  12,  58,  78; 
2.  13.  54.  58,  78;  2.  14,  54,  58; 
2.  14,  15,  65;  2.  15,  44,  45; 
2.  17,  44,  45;  2.  19,  20,  78;  2, 
20,   54;   2.   21,   54;  2.   22,   58; 

2.  23,  40,  44,  78;  3.  1-4,  II,  76; 
3-  2,  51.  55:  3-  3,  45.  207,  271; 

3.  5,  280;  3.  7,  68;  3.  9,  65,  69; 

3.  15,  47:4.  I-".  76.  276;  4.  4, 
46;  4.  5,  42;  4.  6,  46;  4.  7,  46; 

4.  8,  83;  4.  10,  46;  4.  12,  58; 
4.  12-17,  45;  4-  14.  44.  45.  62; 

4.  15,  16,90:4.  17,51:4.23,51; 

5.  I,  81,  278;  5.  3,  51:  5.  6,  47; 
5.  10,  47,  51;  5.  14,  83;  5.  17, 
40,  91:  5.  19,  51;  5.  20,  48,  51: 

5.  21,  46;  5.  27,  46;  5.  31.  46: 

5-  33.  46:  5-  34-37.  70;  5-  35. 
42:  5.  38,  46;  5.  43,  46;  5.  45, 
48;  5.  48,  250;  6.  I,  48,  50:  6. 
1-18,  76;  6.  9,  50:  6.  9-13,  281: 

6.  33.  48,  50:  7-  7.  76;  7-  7-15. 
76:  7.  9-10,  249;  7.  II,  252, 
306:  7.  14,  59;  7.  15,  62;  7,  17, 
45:  7.  22,  76;  7.  23,  41;  7.  29, 


56;  8.  1-15,  76;  8.  2,  136,  153 
8.  5,  281:  8.  10,  65:8.  II,  12,66 

8.  12,  69;  8.  16,  162:  8.  17,  44 
45:  8.  19-22,  249:  8.  25,  153 
279:  8.  27,  55;  8.  29,  55;  9.  6 
273;  9-  9.  22,  36;  9.  9-19,  22 

9.  II,  48;  9.  13,  31:  9.  14,  48 
9.   14-17,  77;  9.   15-17,  32;  9 

18,  281:  9.  18-33,  76;  9-  24,  53 

9.  27,  54:  9.  34,  69;  9.  35,  51 

10.  3,  20,  37;  10.  5,  6,  41,  215 

10.  9,  71;  ID.  10,  280;  10.  37 
38,  77;   10.  41,  49;   II.  2,  62 

11.  10,  46;  II.  21,  66;  II.  23 
24,  66;  12.  1-14,  281;  12.  2,  48 

12.  3.  47.  54;  12.  5,  47;  12.  15 
58;  12.  15-21,45;  12.  17,44,45 

12.  23,  54;  12.  24,  69;  12.  28 
50;  12.  38-42,  77;  12.  41,  42 
276;  12.  43-45,  60;  12.  45,  76 

13.  1-32,  77;  13.  II,  52;  13.  14 
44;  13.  15,  61;  13.  17,  49;  13 

16.  162;  13.  19,  51;  13.  24,  52 
13-  31,  52,  261;  13.  33,  52;  13 
35.  44;  13-  41,  41.  56;  13-  43 
49;  13-  44.  52;  13-  45.  52;  13 
47.  52;  13-  49.  49;  13-  52,  52 

13-  55.  162;  13.  58,  161;  14.  2 
280;  14.  5,  281;  14.  12,  62;  14 
13,  58;  14.  19,  271;  14.  23,  83 

14-  33.  163;  15.  2,  48;  15.  13 
60;  15.  21,  58;  15.  22,  54;  15 
24,  41;  15.  28,  65;  15.  29,  83 

15-  34.  76;  15-  37.  76;  16.  9 
163;  16.  12,  69;  16.  18,  67;  16 

19,  56;  16.  28,  148;  17.  I,  81 
281;  17.  4,  153;  17.  11-13.  62 

17.  15,  154;  17.  20,  83;  17.  23 
163;   17.   25,   70;   18.    1-4,   51 

18.  6,  10,  14,  77;  18.  12,  83 
248;  18.  17,  67;  18.  21,  22,  76 

19.  4,  47;  19.  17,  162;  19.  24 
50,  279;  19.  28,  42,  57;  20.  12 
13.  59:  20.  29-34,  282;  20.  30, 
54;  20.  31,  54;  21.  I,  83;  21.  4 
44;  21.  5,  55;  21.  9,  55;  21.  12 
42;  21.  12,  13,  55;  21.  13,  46 
21.  15,  54;  21.  16,  47;  21.  19, 


347 


348      THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 


60;  21.  21,  83;  21.  31,  50;  21. 
31,  32,  38;  21.  32,  49,  68;  21. 
42,  47;  21.  43,  50,  60,  66;  22.  2, 
52;  22.  9,  54,  66;  22.   14,   59; 

22.  15-40,  77;  22.  19,  70;  22. 
25,  76;  22.  31,  47;  22.  44,  271; 

23.  2,  3,  41;  23.  13-36,  62;  23, 
13.  69;  23.  15,  69;  23.  16-22, 
70;  23.  21,  42;  23.  23,  69;  23. 

25,  69;  23.  27,  69;  23.  28,  41, 
49;  23.  29,  49,  69;  23.  33,  60, 
68,  69;  23.  35,  49;  23.  38,  60; 

24.  I,  60;  24.  3,  81,  83;  24.  II, 
62;  24.  12,  41,  59;  24.  14,  51, 
277;  24.  15,  42,  203;  24.  15,  16, 
82;  24.  16,  83;  25.  I,  53;  25.  13, 
258;  25.  31,  57;  25.  32-46,  62; 
25-  34,  53,  57;  25.  37,  49;  25. 
41,  53;  25.  46,  49;  26.  13,  51; 

26.  22,  154;  26.  24,  45,  46;  26. 
26-29,  277;  26.  30,  83;  26.  31, 
46;  26.  39-44,  77;  26.  47,  136; 
26.  52-55,  55;  26.  53,  57;  26. 
54,  44;  26.  56,  44;  26.  61,  42; 

26.  64,  55;  26.  69-75,  77;  26. 
71,  282;  27.  4,  49;  27.  5,  58; 
27.9,44,46;  27.  II,  55:27.  17, 
22,  23,  77;  27.  19,  50,  65,  78; 

27.  24,  50;  27.  28,  29,  55;  27. 
35,  61;  27.  37,  55;  27.  39,  58; 

27.  42,  55;  27.  45,  57;  27.  46, 
58;  27.  49,  280;  27.  50,  57;  27. 
51-53,  42,  57;  27.  62,  69;  27. 
63,  69;  28.  I,  282;  28.  16,  82; 

28.  18,  56;  28.  18,  19,  67;  28. 
18-20,  77;  28.  19,  42,  62,  67 

Mark 

I.  3,  271;  I.  5,  126,  136;  I.  10, 
130;  I.  12,  130,  131,  152;  I.  13, 
137;  I.  16,  142;  I.  18,  130;  I. 
20,  130;  I.  21,  45,  130;  I.  22, 
139;  I.  23,  130;  I.  24,  152; 
I.  25,  143;  I.  27,  139,  148;  I. 
28,  130;  I.  29,  130;  I.  29-32, 
142;  I.  30,  130;  I.  32,  33,  162; 
I.  35,  132,  153;  I-  35-38,  152; 
I.  36,  142;  I.  37,  136;  I.  38, 
141;  I.  40,  136,  153;  I.  41,  161; 

1.  42,  130;  I.  43,  130,  161;  I.  44, 
136;  I.  45,  132,  136,  137,  161; 

2.  2,  136;  2.  II,  273;  2.  12,  139, 
149;  2.  13,  136;  2.  14,  137;  2. 
14-19,  20;  2.  14-22,  22;  2.  18, 
126;  2.  23,  136;  3.  1-26,  158; 


3.  5,  138,  152,  153,  161;  3.  7, 
58,  131;  3.  15,  158;  3.  16-19, 
37;  3.  17,  120,  126;  3.  18,  20,  37; 

3.  20,  129,  136,  152;  3.  21,  152, 
156,  161;  3.  27,  136;  4.  I,  136; 

4.  8,  137;  4-  II,  158;  4-  13,  162; 

4.  15,  158;  4.  21,  128;  4.  26-29, 
152,  156;  4.  31,  261;  4.  37-40, 

153;  4-  38,  137,  153,  279;  4-  41, 
139;  5-  7,  8,  273;  5.  9,  161;  5.9, 
15,  128;  5.  22,  137;  5.  23,  281; 

5.  25,  26,228;  5.  30,  161;  5.  41, 
126,  137;  5.  42,  149;  6.  2,  139, 
149;  6.  3,  125,  156,  162;  6.  5, 
152,  161;  6.  6,  132,  138,  153, 
161;  6.  7,  137;  6.  8,  71;  6.  8,  9, 
280;  6.  16,  280;  6.  19,  158;  6. 
19,  20,  281;  6.  22,  158;  6.  27' 
128;  6.  30,  132;  6.  30-32,  153; 

6.  31,  129,  131,  132,  152,  141; 
6.  34,  138,  153;  6.  37,  128;  6. 
38,  161;  6.  41,  271;  6.  46,  131; 
6.  48,  161;  6.  51,  139,  149;  6. 
52,  163;  7-  3,  4,  126;  7.  4,  8, 
128;  7.  II,  126;  7.  19,  156;  7. 
24,  131,  132,  161;  7.  28,  154, 
249;  7-  31,  131;  7-  31-35,  152; 
7-  32-37,  156;  7-  33,  138;  7-  34, 
126,  137,  153;  7.  37,  149;  8.  2, 
153;  8.  12,  138,  152,  153,  161; 
8.  14,  137;  8.  17,  141,  162;  8. 
18,  157;  8.  22-26,  144,  152,  156; 
8.  23,  161;  8.  28,  142;  8.  29,  147; 

8.  31,  141;  8.  33,  145;  9.  I,  148; 

9.  2,  131,  132,  281;  9.  2-9,  153; 
9.  5,  154;  9.  6,  146;  9.  10,  163; 

9.  12,  161;  9.  16,  161;  9.  17, 
154;  9.  21,  161;  9.  26,  162;  9. 
30,  161;  9.  32,  163;  9.  33,  161; 
9-  33.  34,  163;  9.  41,  158;  10.  3, 
161;  10.  14,  138,  152,  153,  161; 

10.  17,  138;  10.  18,  162;  10.  21, 
138,  153,  161;  10.  22,  1381  10. 
24,  139;  10.  25,  279;  10.  26,  139; 
10.  32,  138,  139,  141;  10.  28,' 
136;  10.  41,  136;  10.  46,  126, 
137;  10.  46-52,  282;  10.  47,  136; 

10.  50,   139;   10.  51,   137,   154; 

11.  I,  131;  II.  II,  132;  II,  12, 
153;  II.  15,  138;    II.   17,  277; 

11.  19,  132;  II.  21,  143;  12.  8, 
151;  12.  12,  158;  12.  14,  128;  12. 
15,  128;  12.  18,  126;  12.  36,  271; 

12.  41,    137;    12.  42,  128;    13.  3, 


INDEX  OF  TEXTS 


349 


126:13.3.4, 137:13- 10,277;  13. 
14,  158,  203:  13.  32,  152;  13. 

33,  258;  13-  55,  156;  14-  5,  128; 
14.  6,  141;  14.  12,  126;  14.  13, 
114;  14.  14,  161;  14.  19,  154; 
14.  22-25,  277;  14-  33,  138;  14- 

34,  131;  14.  36,  126,  137;  14. 
37,  146;  14.40,  163;  14.50,  141; 
14.51,52,  115,  157;  14.60,  139; 

14.  65,  158;  14.  68,  137;  14.  69, 
282;  14.  72,  158;  15.  6,  126; 

15.  15,  128;  15.  16,  128;  15.  21, 
137;  15.  22,  126;  15.  34,  126; 

15.  36,  280;  15.  37,  57;  15.  39, 
147;  15.  40,  20,  21,  137;  15.  42, 
126;  15.  44,  158;  16.  2,  169,  282; 

16.  7,  143;  16.  8,  167,  173,  174; 
16.  9,  169;  16.  9-20,  164-174; 
16.  17,  18,  167;  16.  19,  154; 
16.  20,  148,  155 

Luke 

I.  1-4,  199,  287;  I.  3,  178,  217; 
I.  3,  4,  217;  I.  4,  290;  I.  5,  217; 

1.  10,  261;  I.  19,  209;  I.  26-38, 
238;  I.  28-33,  261;  I.  46-48, 
232;  I.  46-55,  261;  I.  52,  53, 
238;  I.  64,  263;  I.  68,  253;  I. 
68-79,  261;  I.  80,  199;  2.  I, 
215;  2.  I,  2,  215,  217;  2.  4-7, 
253;  2.  7,  238;  2.  8-20,  239; 

2.  10,  207,  209;  2.  13,  263;  2. 
14,  262;  2.  20,  263;  2.  21,  253; 
2.  21,  22,  217;  2.  22,  253;  2.  22- 
24,  239;  2.  25-38,  239;  2.  28, 
263;  2.  29-32,  214,  262;  2.  38, 
253;  2.  40,  199,  253;  2.  41-52, 
221;  2.  42,  217;  2.  42-46,  254; 

2.  51,  254:  2.  52,  199,  254;  3.  I, 
215;  3.  I,  2,  215,  217;  3.  3,  51, 
280;  3.  4,  271;  3.  5,  6,  207;  3.  7, 
68;  3.  II,  239;  3.  12,  20,  31; 
3-  15,  225;  3.  18,  209;  3.  18-20, 
217;  3.  21,  256;  3.  23,  217; 

3.  23-38,  199;  3-  38,  40,  206; 

4.  1-13,  276;  4.  8,  224;  4.  10, 
263;  4.  16-30,  221;  4.  18,  195, 
209,  224,  239;  4.  22,  210,  249; 
4.  23,  224;  4.  24-27,  251;  4.  25- 
30,  207;  4.  29,  213;  4.  31,  206, 
261;  4.  33-37,  200;  4.  38,  39, 
226;  4.  43,  209;  5.  4-1 1,  219; 
5-  5,  259;  5-  8,  9,  225;  5.  II, 
240;  5.  12,  224;  5.  16,  256;  5. 
24,  273;  5.  25,  26,  263;  5.  27, 


19:  5-  27-39.  22;  5.  28,  36,  240 
6.  i-ii,  281;  6.  II,  225;  6.  12 
13,  257;  6.  14-16,  37;  6.  15,  19 
20,  37;  6.  17,  278;  6.  17,  18 
224;  6.  20,  240;  6.  21,  47,  240 
6.  22,  48;  6.  24,  240;  6.  25,  240 

6.  35,  243;  6.  36,  250;  6.  39 
249;  7.  3,  281;  7.  11-15,  234 

7.  11-17,  202,  220,  224;  7.  16 
263;  7.  22,  209;  7.  36-50,  200, 
221,  235,  244,  259;  7.  39,  225 

7.  41-43,  220;  7.  48,  2lo;  8.  I 
209;  8.  2,  3,  200,  233;  8.  3,  201 

8.  15,  249;  8.  24,  259,  279;  8 
28,  29,  273;  8.  38,  200;  8.  43 
228;  8.  51,  203;  9.  I,  224;  9 
1-6,  215;  9.  2,  224;  9.  3,  71 

9.  6,  209,  224;  9.  7,  280;  9.  16 
271;  9.  18-22,  257;  9.  26,  263 

9.  28,  203,  281;  9.  28,  29,  257 
9-  33,  259;  9.  46-48,  51;  9-  49 
200,  259;  9.  49-54,  221;  9.  52- 
55,  251;  9-  53,  213;  10.  I,  113 

10.  1-20,  183;  10.  8,  249;  10.  9 
224;  10.  25,  53;  10.  25-37,  220 

10.  30-37,  252;  10.  38-42,  200 
221,  234,  259;  II.  1-4,  257;  II 
2-4,  281;  II.  5-9,  258;  II.  5-8 
220;  II.  II,  12,  249;  II.  13,  252 

11.  14,  54;  II.  27,  200,  236 
II.  31,  32,  276;  II.  37-52,  259 
II.  51,  49;  12.  8,  9,  263;  12 
16-21,  220,  240;  12.  31,  49;  12 
35-48,  220;  13.  6-9,  220;  13 
10-17,  220,  224,  235;  13.  13 
263;  13.  19,  261;  13.  23-29,  251 

13.  31,  261;  13.  32,  201;  14.  1-6 
224,  260;  14.  1-7,  220;  14.  7-1 1 
220,  241,  260;  14.  12-14,  260 

14.  15-24,  260;  14.  16,  53;  14. 
16-24,  220;  14.  21,  241;  14.  28- 
30,  220;  14.  31,  32,  220;  14.  33, 
240;  15.  3-10,  220;  15.  10,  263; 

15.  II,  53;  15-  11-32,  244;  16. 
1-13,  220;  16.  16,  209;  16.  19- 
26,  226;  16.  19-31,  220,  240; 
17.  7-10,  220;  17.  II,  19,  220, 
224,  252;  17.  13,  259;  17.  15, 
263;  18.  I,  258;  18.  1-8,  220, 
234,  258;  18.  7,  258;  18.  9-14, 
258;  18.  10-14,  220;  18.  15-17, 
230;  18.  25,  226,  279;  18.  35- 
43,  282;  18.  41,  154;  18.  43,  263; 
19.  i-io,  221;  19.  2-10,  244; 


.350     THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 

19.  6-9,  260;  19.  11-27,  220;  9.  34,  305,  325;  9.  3&-42,  325; 

19.   37,  263;    19.   41-44.   254;  10.  I,  325;  10.  1-48,  317;  10. 

19.  46,  277;  20.  I,  209;  20.  36,  3-7,  326;  10.  9,  10,  224;  10.  9- 

263;  20.  42,  43,  271;  21.  5-36,  16,  326;  10.  13-16,  305;  10.  16, 

202;  21.  8-19,  277;  21,  36,  249,  326;  10.  26,  326;  10.  28,  326; 

258;  22.  I,  206;  22.  17-19.  277;  10.  36-40,  143;  10.  36-43.  305; 

22.  19,  248;  22.  20,  248;  22.  27,  10.  38,  130,  308;  10.  44,  308; 
242;  22.  31,  32,  145,  257;  22.  10.  46,  326;  II.  5-10,  326;  II. 

32,  104;  22.  40,  258;  22.  43,  255,  13,  306;  II.  19-30,  193;  II.  24, 
263;  22.  44,  224,  255;  22.  48,  307;  II.  25,  335;  II.  26,  313, 
255;  22.  50,  51,  220;  22.  51,  335;  II.  27,  193;  II.  28,  202, 
224;  22.  58,  282;  23.  5-12,  201;  215;  II.  30,  335;  12.  2,  303; 

23.  23,  213;  23.  27,  28,  236;  23.  12.  6-12,  325;  12.  12,  99,  loi; 
27-29,  200;  23.  34,  257;  23.  40-  12.  12,  25,  100,  102;  12.  13, 
43,  221,  244;  23.  43,  211;  23.  loi;  12.  23,  224;  12.  25,  335; 
46,  57,  255,  257;  23.  47,  255;  13.  I,  201;  13.  1-3,  193;  13.  2, 
23.  49,  200;  23.   50,  51,  242;  107,  307;  13.  4,  307;  13.  5,  13, 

23.  56,  200;  24.    I,  200,  282;  100,  102;  13.  6-11,  325;  13.  7, 

24.  3,  249;  24.  10,  201;  24.  13-  107;  13.  II,  226;  13.  12,  325; 
35,  202,  221;  24.  21,  253;  24.  13.  13,  102,  107;  14.  8-10,  325; 

23,  263;  24.  34,  248;  24.  30,  31,  14.  12-14,  326;  14.  15,  326;  15. 
260;  24.  39-43,  256;  24.  41,  225;  1-3,  193;  15.  28,  307;  15.  30- 

24.  47,  214,  251;  24.  52,  53,  226;  40,  193;  15.  37,  100;  15.  37-40. 
24.53,261,263  185;  15.  39,  100,  103,  III;  16. 

John  ^'  7'  305;  16.  10,  182,  305;  16. 

I   d2    iQ-  c;    17    c;d-  6    I";    <&■  ^°~'7.  335;  16.  12,  331;  16.  14, 

I.   42,    19,    5.    17,    54,    O.    15,    50,  ^     I/I-16    1T7-  16    18     'X2i:- 

6. 66, 114;  II.  16, 20;  II.  35,  v^^;^ ;.  ^T^'^oc' T^' ^7^^!: 

254;  12.  \o,  183;  '18.   10,  lis;  ^-  r^ife'^Iv^^'  33o''i'8'°i' 

-51-  25.  275.  310  12-17,  180;      18.     14-17,   325;    18. 

Acts  25,   310;   19.  6,  307,  326;    19. 

1.  I,  304;  I.  13,  37,  303;  I.  14,  9,  310;  19.  II,  15,  325;  19. 
319;  I.  22,  143;  I.  26,  303;  2.  4,  12,  325;  19.  23,  310;  20.  5, 
308;  2.  13,  325;  2.  22,  23,  155;  6,  182;  20.  5-15,  335;  20.  9-12, 

2.  22-24,  143;  2.  32,  155;  2.  32-  325;  20.  28,  307;  20.  33,  325; 

33,  304;  2.  32-36,  305;  2.  34,  21.  1-18,  335;  21.  8-10,  335; 
155;  2.  36,  155;  2.  36-47.  316;  21.  15-18,  182;  21.  16,  201;  22. 
2.  38,  307;  2.  47,  263;  3.  1-12,  4,  310;  22.  7,  8,  10,  326;  23.  6, 
303;  3.  2-10,  325;  3.  6,  305,  9.  326;  23.  26,  194;  24.  3,  194; 
325;  3.  7,  224;  3.  8,  263;  3.  9,  24.  14,  310;  24.  22,  310;  26.  13- 
263;  3.  13,  151;  3-  16,  304,  305;  18,  326;  26.  22,  23,  305;  26.  24, 
4.  27,  150;  5._i-li,  325;  5-  15,  325;  26.  25,  194;  28.  6,  326; 
325;  5-  16,  325;  5.  17,  34,  326;  28.  7,  331;  28.  8,  224,  325;  28. 
5-  34-39.  325;  5-  42,  305;  6.  3,  9.  325 

f  ^Jc \f?\nT''. \^^'.lc'  i^'V  Romans 

7.  55.  56,  305;  7-  58,  335;  8.  I,  g       .. 

335;  8.  5.  305;  8.  7.  325;  8.  12,  fco    '16    8     i5?'    16     il'   127' 

316;  8.  14,  303;  8.  17,  308;  8.  If  "is    i.g'.  i6^^2c   246         ^' 

17-20,  326;  8.    18-24,  325;  8.  ^^-  ^5.  179.  10.  25,  240 

27-40,  317;  9.  1-19,  317;  9.  I-  I  Corinthians 

30,  335;  9-  2,  310;  9.  3-6,  305;  9.  5,  318;  10.  27,  249;  II.  24, 

9.  3-8,  326;  9.   10-17,  326;  9.  248;  II.  25,  248;  13.  5,  III;  13. 

17.  307;  9.  18,  224;  9.  31,  308;  13,  248;  15.  5,  248;  16.  5,  179 


INDEX  OF  TEXTS 


3SI 


2  Corinthians 

1.  9,  l86;  8.  9,  238;  8.  18,  19, 
183;  II.  23-27,  320 

Galatians 

2.  11-18,  104;  4.  13,  185;  6.  6, 
291 

Ephesians 
4.  4-6,  248;  6.  18,  249 

Philippians 

I.  13,  181;  2.  7,  150;  4.  22,  181 

Colossians 

I.  10,  II,  249;  4.  6,  249;  4.  10, 
100,  104,  178,  199;  4.  10,  II, 
99;  4.   10-14,   191;  4-   II.   103; 

4.  12,  179;  4.  14,  178,  179,  185, 
199 

I  Timothy 

5.  17,  291 


2  Timothy 

2.  8,  246;  4.  10,  II,  178;  4.  II, 

100,  103,  178,  182 
Titus 

3-  13,  179 
Philemon 

24,  100,  103,  178,  199 
James 

3-  9,  263 

1  Peter 

5.  ID,  104;  5.  13,  100,  loi,  103, 
185 

2  Peter 

1.  18,  81 
Revelation 

2.  13,  179;  2.  17,  20;  3.  9,  93; 

3.  17,  93;  II.  3,  4,  304 


III.   INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS 


Accuracy  of  Luke,  217-218,  329- 

333 
Activity  and  rest  of  Jesus,  129- 

133 
Acts  of  Paul  and  Thecla,  243 
Adventures  of  Paul,  320 
Angels,  in  Luke,  263-264 
Apocalypse  of  John,  92-93 
Apostle  groups,  32-33 
Augustine  on  Mark,  123,  124 
Authorship  traditional,  sustained, 

12-14 

Barnabas,  193,  195 

and  Mark,  102 
Bartimjeus,  282 
Beatitudes,  76 
Benedictus,  282 
Bible,  a  Jewish  book,  205 
Blind  man  cured,  144 

Call  of  Matthew,  22-33 
Catechism  instruction,  290-291 
Cathedral   of  Saint   Mark,    117- 

118,  159 
Catholicity  of  first  Gospel,  17 
Children,  no,  in  John,  229-230 
Church  in  Antioch,  192-193 
Claudia  Procla,  50,  79 
Coins  of  Palestine,  71,  72 
Colden,  Cadwalleder,  24 
Commission,  the  great,  42,  82-83 
Complaint  of  Pharisees,  31 
Contradictions  in  Synoptics,  280- 

282 
Contrasts  in  Acts,  324 
in  Luke,  223 
Conversions  in  Acts,  316-317 
Cornelius,  143 

Cowardice  of  Mark,  106-107 
Crucifixion  of  Jesus,  57 
Cry  of  dereUction,  58-59 

Demas,  177 

Denunciation  of  the  Pharisees,  56, 

60,  62,  68-69 
Diminutives  in  Mark,  136 


Disciples'  Prayer,  75 
Discourses,  minor,  of  Jesus,  80 
Documentary    theory,     293-294, 
296 

Earliest    and    latest    sayings    of 

Jesus,  212 
Educated  leaders,  195 
Epistles  of  Paul,  319-320 

Faith  of  Gentiles,  65 
Feast,  Matthew's,  28-32 
First   and   Second   Gospels   con- 
trasted, 45-46,  160-163 
First  Gospel,  unequaled,  18 
Fool,  the  rich,  240-241 

GalUo  and  Paul,  180-181 
Genealogy  of  Luke,  206-207 

of  Matthew,  39-40,  53, 
62-64,  74-75 
Gloria  in  excelsis,  261 
Gospels,  primitive,  291-292 
Graciousness  of  Jesus,  209-213 

Healing  of  infirm  woman,   229- 

230 
Hebrew  Matthew,  the,  85-86 
Hebrews,  Epistle  to,  91 
Herod  the  Great,  53-54,  215 
Holy  Spirit  in  Acts,  306-308 

in  Luke,  252 
Homesickness  of  Mark,  105-106 
Humanity  of  Jesus,  253-261 
Hymns  in  Luke,  261-263 

Imagination,  legitimate,  196 
Importance  of  first  Gospel,  17-19 
Individual  responsibility,  33-34 
Inspiration  not  mechanical,  285- 
286 

Jairus,  32 

James,  Epistle  of,  92 
James  the  Less,  20 
Jealousy  of  Mark,  107-108 


352 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS 


353 


Jesus  astonishing  people,  148-149 
authority  of,  55-57 
his  disabiUties,  161-162 
his   human    emotions,    160- 

161 
no  respecter  of  persons,  27- 
28 

Jewish  priority,  41 

John  the  Baptist,  31-32,  50,  62 

Joseph,  47,  78 

Joseph  of  Arimathaea,  242 

Joses,  21 

Judas,  38 

Kingliness  of  Jesus,  54-55 

Law  and  tradition,  41 

Lord,  the  title,  in  Mark,  153-155 

Lucanus  the  poet,  179-182,  187, 
198 

Luke  and  Herod's  court,  200-201 
and  Mark,  200 
and  women,  200 
the  historian,  215-216 

Magnificat,  261 

Mark,  his  martyrdom,  116 

his  symbol,  105,  119,  151 
stump-fingered,  100,  135 
Mary  and  Martha,  211,  234 
Mary  Magdalene,  169,  233 
Mary,  mother  of  Jesus,  54,  231- 

233.  319 
Mary,  mother  of  Mark,  loi 
Mary,  mother  of  Matthew,  20 
Matthew,  a  new  name,  19-20 
meaning  of  name,  19 
a  man  of  means,  36 
a  modest  man,  36-38 
a  pessimist,  35,  59-61 
a  publican,   23-25,  37, 
68-72 
Miracles  in  Mark,  144,  147-148 
in  Matthew,  73,  88 
in  Luke,  219-220 
Modesty  of  Peter,  144-146 

Nazareth,  Jesus  at,  209-210 
Nicolas  of  Antioch,  192 
Nunc  Dimittis,  262 

Oaths,  70-71 

Odds  against  Christianity,  313 


Oral  Tradition  Theory,  289-293, 

296 
Oriental  memory,  290-291 

Palsied  man  cured,  26-27 
Parables  in  Luke,  220,  221 

of  the  Kingdom,  52,  73 
Parallels  in  history,  327-328 
Paul  and  Luke,  226 

and  Mark,  103-104,  109-110 
Pentateuch  and  Matthew,  42-43 
Personality  and  authorship,    11- 

12,  83-85,  86-88 
Peter  and   Mark,    101-102,    104, 

120-123,  141-146,  185 
Pharisee  and  publican,  37 
Polemic  in  Matthew,  89-90 
Politarchs  in  Macedonia,  330-331 
Poverty  of  Jesus,  238 
Prayer  parables  of  Luke,  258 
Prayers  of  Jesus,  256-259 
Preface  of  Luke,  286-287 
Prodigal  Son,  210,  244 
Program  of  second  Gospel,  143 
Prophecy,  Old  Testament,  40,  43- 

47 
Psychologist,  Luke  as,  224-226 
Publican,  the  Jewish,  23-25 

Rahab,  63 

Redemption,  in  Luke,  253 

Relationships  of  Matthew,  20-21 

Revelation  in  dreams,  77-79 

Rome  and  Mark,  126-128 

Rufus,  127-128 

Ruth,  63-64 

Samaritans  and  Jesus,  251-252 
Scholasticism,  288 
Seneca  and  Paul,  181 
Serapis,  116 

Sermon  on  the  mount,  79,  278 
Sermons  in  Acts,  315-316 
Seventy  sent,  214 
Simon  of  Cyrene,  127 
Social  Hfe  of  Jesus,  259-261 
Social  outcasts,  244-245 
Son  of  David,  54 
Sympathy  of  Jesus,  243 

Table   of   Synoptic   coincidences, 
279 


354      THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  THE  ACTS 


Temple  tax,  70 

Texts  of  Jesus,  51,  209-210,  239- 

240 
Theophilus,  187,  194,  197 
Thief,  the  dying,  21 1-2 12,  244 
Thomas  Didymus,  20-21,  37 
Titus,  319 
Tribute  money,  70 
Trust  in  riches,  241-243 

Unclean  meats,  156-157 
Unfinished  book,  one,  323 
Unity  of  authorship,  86-87 
University  at  Tarsus,  186 
Upper  room,  1 14 


Vegetarianism  of  Matthew,  33 
Versatility  of  Luke,  199,  218 
Vocabulary  of  Luke,  222-223,  250 

Walk  to  Emmaus,  183 
Woes  tmto  the  rich,  240 
Woman  who  was  a  sinner,  210, 

235,  244 
Women  in  the  genealogy,  62-64 
Words  of  Jesus,  275 
Widows,  in  Luke,  234-235 
Wise  Men,  53 

Zacchaeus  the  publican,  37,  211, 
242,244 


Date  Due 

N  1  3  '43 

Mr  22  '^ 

k^ri 

^,p   '6  '^    '^ 

r.. 

> 

''^t 

-*.!•' 

1^,- 

p.*" 

|^l?i|l(f{««»aiif^ 

^iiJiiiSai<i«JMita 

I. 

— ^ 

1              -*-- 

M 

Jr" 

$) 

BS2569.4.H41 

The  Synoptic  gospels  and  the  book  of 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00034  0168 


